This is Google's cache of http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/globe-articles.htm
as retrieved on 22 Mar 2007 22:32:48 GMT.Google's cache is
the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.The
page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.This
cached page may reference images which are no longer available.
Click here for the cached text only.To link to or bookmark
this page, use the following url:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:88tIpMaDY3cJ:www.holysmoke.org/cos/globe-articles.htm+scientology+toronto+fire+1977&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6

Google is neither affiliated with the
authors of this page nor responsible for its
content.

Lots of juicy stuff about just what the local Scientology tentacle was
getting up to during those times. There's also a couple of opinion columns, by
Michael Valpy (Globe columnist) and Al Buttnor, loveable Scientology OSA type
person.

I typed these in over the long weekend on a computer where the 'w' key had
some unhandled keyboard thetan clusters. So if you see any spelling mistakes,
please let me know. I've tried to preserve the original spelling mistakes from
the original stories, but otherwise all transcription mistakes are mine.

Oh, and stay tuned for a nifty announcement from the Canadian branch of the
ARSCC in the next few weeks.

Globe and
Mail, Saturday, March 5, 1983, P.5 Warrants for search contested by church by
William Nellis Scientologists are going to the Supreme Court of Ontario Monday
morning seeking to quash a search warrant used by more than 100 Ontario
Provincial Police officers to cart off about 800 boxes packed with Church of
Scientology of Toronto materials.

Clayton Ruby, hired yesterday by the organization, said that a basic right
of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is at issue.

"Can they (the police) take property, and then keep secret the means by
which they take it? I don't think so, and I've asked the Supreme Court to rule
on it."

Because he was refused a copy of the search warrant, Mr. Ruby also filed a
motion demanding that all evidence taken by the OPP be [ALMOST ILLEGIBLE,
PROBABLY IS: sealed while the motion to dismiss] the warrant was dealt with,
and an additional motion to "compel someone to give us access to the warrant."

"Without the warrant, we can't proceed with the motion to quash," Mr.

Ruby said.

On Thursday, the officers, some armed with sledgehammers and fire extinguishers, raided
the Scientologists' building at Yonge and St.

Mary streets seeking evidence in their two-year investigation into tax
exemptions claimed by the organization and the marketing of courses.

(The Church of Scientology, which says it
has an active membership of about 5,000 in Metro Toronto, is not recognized
as a church in Ontario and cannot perform marriages.)

Working through the night, the officers filled about 800 boxes with Scientology materials,
including books, cassette tapes, financial documents and "about 100 personal
files," Nicole Crellin, a Scientology spokesman,
said. The last officers left the building about 11 a.m. yesterday.

Earl Smith, vice-president of the Toronto organization, said
the most damaging loss was the personal files.

"They are like confessions in other churches. Counsellors use these files
to help the person they are working with to overcome their problems."

Mr. Smith also questioned the use of force to break into three rooms.

"There were plenty of people here who would have gladly unlocked the doors
if the officers asked."

Mr. Ruby said that officers told members of Scientology that they had
been told by the Crown Law Office not to leave a copy of the search warrant.

Globe and Mail, Friday, March 11, 1983, P.5 Stall police,
destroy evidence is Scientology plan, PCs say
by Kevin Cox Officials of the Church of Scientology have a system
to destroy evidence and stall any police search at their headquarters in Toronto, says a statement
by Attorney-General Roy McMurtry and Solicitor-General George Taylor.

The actions of the 100 Ontario Provincial Police officers who raided the
church's headquarters on Yonge Street on March 3 ith sledge hammers and fire extinguishers were
defended in the statement, which accuses church officials and lawyers of
spreading disinformation about the raid.

The allegations about a system to destroy evidence were angrily denied by
church president Caroline Charbonneau last night.

No charges have been laid after the raid, which police say was conducted as
part of a two-year investigation into tax exemptions and the cost of courses
at the church.

Mrs. Charbonneau said in an interview that police and the two Cabinet
ministers responsible for the raid have "selectively grab-bagged information
about Scientology to
slide around the Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

The ministers' statement says [ILLEGIBLE] preparation and planning went
into the raid, where over 250,000 documents were seized.

Seventy-six of those were ordered sealed by Mr. Justice Allen Linden of the
Ontario Supreme Court earlier this week because they may be privileged under
the freedom of religion clauses of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms.

The statement says that the Scientologists had conducted drills and had
written instructions and a warning system to alert officials about what to do
in the event of a police search and how to stall it.

It also says that the centre had written instructions on how to dispose of
sensitive or "Z" materials by shredding or vetting the documents.

Police believe the "Z" materials are the equivalent of sensitive "Red Box"
materials in the United States, which were in portable files which could be
quickly removed.

The church guardian's office, a special area set aside for those church
members who shield church leaders from external attack, was fortified by steel
doors, locked doors, a buzz code system and had shredders, according to the
statement.

The statement adds that six locked doors on the third floor of the Scientology building were
"forced open by police to prevent obstruction or the destruction of evidence
through movement of files and operation of shredders. The building was
otherwise undamaged."

Mrs. Charbonneau said the church only has one "small, antiquated"

shredder and has no written instructions or warning system about police
raids. She added that Scientology members are
told to cooperate with police in the event of a search.

Mrs. Charbonneau said the steel doors to the guardian's office were never
locked and were merely fire exits and the only
door that was smashed by officers was plate glass.

The statement by the two Cabinet minsters also accuses Clayton Ruby, the
lawyer acting for Scientology, of spreading
misinformation about the provincial policy towards search warrants.

Mr. Ruby had stated that Judge Linden had ruled that the Attorney-General's
office was acting "unlawfully" in refusing to allow law enforcement officers
to let him see the search warrant and the 1000 pages of supporting information
used in the raid.

The statement says that Judge Linden didn't say the province had acted
"unlawfully" and that the Attorney-General and Crown law officers have not
instructed police officers not to show citizens search warrants.

But Mr. Ruby said last night that he was not allowed to see the search
warrant the day after the raid.

Globe and Mail, Thursday,
March 24, 1983, P.1 100 officers raid Scientology centre by
William Nellis and Michael Kieran More than 100 Ontario Provincial Police
officers, some armed with sledgehammers and fire extinguishers, raided
the Church of Scientology offices in Toronto yesterday.

OPP Inspector Phil Caney said police, armed with a two-day search warrant,
were seeking evidence in their two-year investigation into tax exemptions
claimed by the Scientologists.

(The Church of Scientology, which says it
has an active membership of about 5,000 in Metro Toronto, is not recognized
as a church in Ontario and cannot perform marriages.)

Police said they were also investigating the marketing of courses by the
organization.

"I can't comment any further than that," Insp. Caney told reporters in
front of the building at Yonge and St. Mary streets that houses the
Scientologists' offices. No arrests were expected to be made at this time, he
added.

The policemen went to the building in three buses. Asked why so many
officers were used, Insp. Caney said they were needed to search the seven
floors and about 75 offices for evidence.

He said some of the officers had fire extinguishers in case
someone tried to burn documents.

Brenda Macklam, 24, the organization's executive secretary, said the Church
of Scientology leases
three floors and a ground-floor reading room-bookstore. The second and third
floors are used by the Toronto branch and the
fourth floor houses the national office.

Nicole Crellin, the organization's public relations spokesman, said police
started entering the building about 2:30 p.m. On the third floor, officers
"busted through one glass door and another door inside an office" with a
sledgehammer. She said no one had been hurt.

Insp. Caney said he "could not comment at this time" about the broken
doors, but a spokesman for the Solicitor-General's Ministry confirmed that
"some doors were busted."

"They're going through everything," Scott Carmichael, a staff member, said
in a telephone interview.

"It's all very confusing. They're even packing away books. I've been on
several floors and the police are just duplicating their efforts,"

said Mr. Carmichael, who added that the telephone conversation was being
monitored by a police officer.

"I was in a room near the reception centre (on the second floor) when I
heard a loud noise," Mr. Carmichael said. "I thought it was a bomb.

Then I saw all these officers walking into the room.

"It was wall-to-wall police. It was a bad scene." At this point, he said
police told him to hang up.

Miss Crellin said that the Scientologists' lawyer, Toby Belman, was in the
building observing as police packed books and papers into cartons.

She said Caroline Charbonneau, the Scientologists' Toronto president, was
"shattered by the experience."

Mick McCoy, executive director of the Scientologists' Ontario office, said
in an interview that he was shocked by the police action, which he described
as unwarranted.

"The Church of Scientology has not
engaged in any illegal or fraudulent activities. We're as above board as any
other church."

Mrs. Macklam said in an interview she was sitting at her desk "when
suddenly about 50 police officers came running in. I asked what was going on
and they told me not to move, not to touch anything."

Mrs. Macklam said she asked to see, and was shown, a search warrant but was
not allowed to touch it. The police officers searched her purse and lunch bag,
and took some papers she described as "various policy letters written by L.
Ron Hubbard (the founder of Scientology)."

Asked how she could tell the letters were authentic - in light of recent
allegations by Mr. Hubbard's son, Ronald DeWolf, that the organization's
founder died two years ago - Mrs. Macklam said: "He has a certain style of
writing . . . . You can tell by whether it makes sense or not. The man has a
lot of common sense."

Mrs. Macklam said she was particularly upset because the officers were
seizing files containing records of counselling sessions conducted at the
building.

"I don't know why they would take the confidential counselling files.

They just contain personal information about peoples' emotional problems."

Globe and Mail, Friday, November 11, 1983, P. A18 Toronto lawyer cites
Australian decision on Scientology status by Jock
Ferguson A recent decision by the highest court in Australia that Scientology is a religion
is a victory "for all those concerned with their own freedom of religion," the
Church of Scientology
in Toronto says.

With the ruling by the High Court on Oct 22, Australia joins the United
States, Britain, and France, among others, as countries that recognize Scientology as a religion.

According to Clayton Ruby, the lawyer for the Church of Scientology in Toronto, "the arguments
(that Scientology is
not a religion) rejected so completely in Australia are precisely the
arguments that Mr. (Roy) McMurtry (the Attorney-General of Ontario) has been
trying to use in Ontario."

The Toronto
organization, which is under investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police,
has moved to quash search warrants used for a police raid on its Yonge Street
premises on March 3, 1983.

The police have been investigating the organization's financial activities,
including income-tax payments, the cost of its courses and the activities of
its guardian office in alleged break-ins and theft, according to Crown
attorney Casey Hill, who is heading the two-year-old investigation.

Caroline Charbonneau, the president and executive director of the Church of
Scientology in Toronto, said yesterday
that the organization has about 5,000 members in Southern Ontario and that its
membership has grown slightly since the police raid.

The Church of Scientology was founded by
L. Ron Hubbard in the late 1950s and is based on his writings.

In the Australian decision, copies of which were handed out at a news
conference called by the Church of Scientology, the
five-member high court ruled "that Scientology is, for
relevant purposes, a religion .

. . . The ideas of Scientology . . . involve
belief in the supernatural and are concerned with man's place in the universe
and his relation to things supernatural."

The court's decision said that "on the criteria used in this case by (a
lower court ruling denying religious status to the Scientologists), early
Christianity would not have been considered religious."

The judges said the church's business practices - the target of the Ontario
police investigation - were no reason to disqualify it as a religion.

"Commercialism is so characteristic of organized religion that is it absurd
to regard it as disqualifying . . . . The amassing of wealth by organized
religions often means that the leaders live richly (sometimes in palaces) even
though many of the believers live in poverty. Many religions have been
notorious for corrupt trafficking in relics, other sacred objects, and
religious offices, as well as for condoning 'sin' in advance, for money.

"The greatest organized religions are big businesses. They engage in
large-scale real estate investment, money dealing and other commercial
ventures. In country after country, religious tax exemption has led to
enormous wealth for religious bodies."

Mr. Hill said in an interview that the Crown has asked for a delay in the
suit to quash the warrants until early next year because it will take at least
two weeks to hear the motion. The motion is scheduled to be heard over three
days later this month.

Globe and Mail, Wednesday, June 13,
1984, P. M3 Scientology
claim called a ploy The Church of Scientology of Toronto is contesting a
search warrant that wasused to raid its headquarters last year because it
wants to shield itself from proper police investigation, a Supreme Court of
Ontario judge was told [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] that the church should not be
allowed to invoke a priest-and-penitent privilege because "here the priest is
the target of the investigation."

Ms Wein said Canadian courts have never recognized a priest-and-penitent
privilege similar to the lawyer-client relationship that allows a lawyer to
maintain confidentiality in his communications with his client.

The Ontario Provincial Police used a search warrant to seize more than
200,000 documents from the church last year. [ILLEGIBLE] confessional records.
They have been sealed by court order while the church has sought to have the
warrant quashed.

The church argues that the court should recognize the confidentiality of
the priest-and-penitent relationship and order the confessional files returned
to it.

Ms Wein said that even if the court does decide that such a privilege
should be recognized under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms' guarantee of
religious freedom, this should not be extended to the church while it is the
target of a [ILLEGIBLE] criminal acts.

"The search for truth is of the highest importance," she said.

The search warrant said that the OPP was seeking evidence that the church
was involved in consumer and tax fraud and conspiracy to commit indictable
offences.

Globe and Mail, Saturday, June 23, 1984, P. A19
Search writ valid, Scientology told The
Church of Scientology
of Torontohas so far failed to quash a search warrant that was used to raid
its headquarters.

Lawyers for the church, claiming religious privilege, had argued that
documents seized by the Ontario Provincial Police when they raided the church
in March, 1983, should be returned and the warrant used by the police should
be quashed.

Mr. Justice John Osler of the Ontario Supreme Court said yesterday that no
priest-penitent privilege exists that would give grounds for quashing the
warrant. He made the ruling without determining whether Scientology is a religion
or a church.

The police seized more than 200,000 documents, including about 750 folders
containing records of what the church claims are its equivalent of
confessions.

More than 100 members of the OPP, some with sledge hammers and fire extinguishers, took
part in the raid. They spent two days trucking documents and church artifacts
away from the church's Yonge Street building.

The police said they were seeking evidence of consumer and tax fraud and
conspiracy to commit indictable offences.

The confessional material and about 6,000 other documents, hich the church
claims are protected by lawyer-client privilege, were ordered sealed shortly
after the raid by court order. They will remain sealed until the hearing
before Judge Osler resumes on Oct. 1 while the church contests the warrant on
other legal grounds.

The church's lawyers argued that Canadian law and the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms' guarantee of religious freedom gave the church grounds for the
warrant to be quashed. They asked Judge Osler to rule that a priest-penitent
privilege exists in law, that a church should be searched with greater caution
and consideration than other places, and that Scientology's members
cannot commit a fraud while engaged in the sincere practice of their faith.

Judge Osler said in his ruling that "in this jurisdiction the almost
universal practice has been to state, or to assume, that no (priest-penitent)
privilege exists, but in a pragmatic way to press counsel not to pursue
questions that would result in compelling a priest or minister of religion to
breach a confidence, or to decline to compel persons claiming such privilege
to answer.

"As I find no privilege attaches to such communications when both parties
are in a recognized priest-penitent relationship, the alleged religious
character of Scientology is of no
relevance and I do not propose to investigate it."

He ruled that the information given by the police to obtain the search
warrant contained nothing to compel Chief Provincial Court Judge Frederick
Hayes, who issued the warrant, to attach any conditions to it that would have
caused the police to use "greater care and sensitivity" during the two-day
search.

The police alleged that the church and several employees defrauded the
public by making fraudulent representations about several church courses and a
device called an E-Meter, which the church claims is used in its confessional.

"It really, really is a significant ruling," said Crown counsel Casey Hill
in an interview. He said the ruling explored new areas of Canadian law.

Clayton Ruby, one of the lawyers representing the church, said in an
interview that "the time ot consider an appeal is at the end of the hearing
when we will know, among other things, whether these particular files will be
ordered returned on traditional search and seizure grounds.

"Meanwhile, the confidences of our parishioners are protected by a sealing
order (Judge Osler) was good enough to give us."

Globe and
Mail, Friday, August 3, 1984, P. M5 Chiropractor urged Scientology class, woman
complains CP A woman who obtained a $5,000 loan for Church of Scientology courses
recommended by her chiropractor has filed a complaint against him with a
chiropractic licencing body.

Margaret Lilbourne, 45, of Brantford, Ont., has written a letter to the
Ontario Board of Directors of Chiropractic that says her chiropractor, Robert
Shackleton, received a commission of 12 to 15 per cent on courses in which she
enrolled at the Kitchener branch of the Church of Scientology.

"I don't think (Mr. Shackleton) should be talking to his patients (about
joining the Church of Scientology), considering
what I know now," Mrs. Lilbourne said in an interview. "He is a good
chiropractor.

I trusted him implicitly."

Stanislaw Stolarski, executive director of the chiropractic board, said
Mrs. Lilbourne's complaint, which he received on Monday, will be reviewed and
the board will decide within two months to call a disciplinary hearing.

"This type of problem has never come to our attention before," he said in
an interview. "This is unusual and very unique. Policy may have to be
developed [ILLEGIBLE] Mrs. Lilbourne, who said her gross income averaged $154
a week when she signed for the courses on May 24, said she decided to withdraw
from the courses in July.

In her letter to the board, Mrs. Lilbourne said that after she asked for a
refund for the courses, she felt "harrassed and threatened" by people at the
centre and once asked a friend and two police officers to accompany her there.

Mrs. Lilbourne said members of the Church of Scientology, who
interviewed her using an E-meter - described as an emotion-measuring device -
asked her why she quit and wanted the names of those who helped her change her
mind about the courses.

She said she got phone calls and visits from members, who persisted in
finding out who was behind her decision.

Mrs. Lilbourne received a $4,673.50 cheque on July 18 from the Church of Scientology after the
Kitchener-Waterloo Record inquired about her case. The refund did not include
the part of the course that she had taken.

"That's fine and dandy if I got my money," she said. "But what about other
people who don't know what to do or who don't have friends to tell them?"

Earl Smith, vice-president at the [ILLEGIBLE] in Toronto, said members are
paid 15 per cent in cash or credit for each dollar their recruits spend on
courses and 12 per cent of what they spend on counselling for as long as they
remain mentor to the recruits.

Globe and Mail, Friday,
August 30, 1984, P. M5 Scientology papers
released by police while case pending by Lorne Slotnick Documents seized last
year from the Church of Scientology have been
released by the Ontario Provincial Police even though a court is to hear
argument this fall on whether the documents are privileged, according to a
lawyer for the church.

Clayton Ruby, the lawyer, said several documents containing information
protected by solicitor-client privilege were given by police to an official of
the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations. That official is
considering a request that the controversial church be allowed to perform
marriages.

"They (the police) are simply ignoring solicitor-client privilege and
making a mockery of the courts," Mr. Ruby says in an letter sent this week to
Ontario Solicitor-General George Taylor.

The letter says the police action violates the Criminal Code and asks the
minister to investigate and discipline the officers involved.

It is Mr. Ruby's second recent complaint about the OPP's handling of
documents seized in a massive raid on the church's Yonge Street headquarters
last year.

"I've never heard of anybody being treated this way except for the Church
of Scientology," Mr.
Ruby said. No charges have been laid as a result of last year's raid.

Mr. Ruby said yesterday that the documents released by the police are
mainly discussions inside the church about legal advice, and as such, they are
privileged. He said one of the documents has already been declared privileged
by the courts. The rest will be the subject of a hearing in October.

He said that in hundreds of searches, police give a "solemn undertaking"
that they will guard documents if there is an argument over whether they are
privileged.

This is the first case he has heard of where that undertaking was broken,
he added. "People are entitled to have their communications with their counsel
kept confidential.

"It's quite unheard of," he added. "What's the point of going to court on
the issue of privilege if the police have already spread the documents? It
really escapes me."

He said he has no idea whether anyone else was given the documents, since
he found out the Consumer Ministry official had them only because she
mentioned them in a letter on the marriage issue to the lawyer representing
the church.

A spokesman for the Solicitor-General Ministry said he had no knowledge of
Mr. Ruby's complaints and that the minister was not in his office yesterday.

Globe and Mail, Saturday, September 1, 1984, P. A16
Scientologists' lawyer accuses official of bias Court action begun by Lorne
Slotnick An Ontario Government official who is to decide whether the Church of
Scientology should be
allowed to perform marriages is biased and should disqualify herself, says a
lawyer for the Scientologists.

Charles Campbell, in a letter to Rosemarie Drapkin, the Ontario deputy
registrar general, cites a series of actions which he says can only mean "your
mind is made up."

Mr. Campbell says Mrs. Drapkin, after a delay of more than a year, has
suddenly given him less than two weeks to reply to a list of 143 documents on
which she will base her decision. He also says the choice of documents ignores
numerous reports favourable to the Scientologists' position and that most of
the documents fall outside the criteria laid don in the province's Marriages
Act.

Some of those documents, Mr. Campbell says, are among those seized from the
church in a police raid over a year ago, and which Scientology lawyers say
have been improperly released to Mrs. Drapkin.

Mr. Campbell has begun a court action to prevent Mrs. Drapkin, of the
Consumer and Commercial Relations Ministry, from using the documents, and
yesterday morning a Supreme Court of Ontario judge ordered Mrs.

Drapkin not to make a decision on the application to perform marriages
until the court resolves the question of her status.

No date has been set yet for the full hearing on the allegation that Mrs.
Drapkin is biased.

A court has yet to hear arguments about whether the seized documents are
protected by solicitor-client privilege, but Clayton Ruby, another Scientology lawyer,
complained earlier this week in a letter to Solicitor-General George Taylor
that they have nevertheless been given to the Consumer Ministry.

A spokesman for Mr. Taylor said yesterday that the minister has asked for a
report from police on Mr. Ruby's complaints about the handling of documents,
but the minister has not received the information yet.

Kim Twohig, a lawyer with the Attorney-General's ministry, said Mrs.

Drapkin got the seized documents with a court order in July, and that it
was not legally necessarily to notify the Scientologists of the procedure.

Ms Twohig agreed that one of the documents given to Mrs. Drapkin had
already been ruled privileged, but said "it as due to misunderstanding . . . .
The police never said 'we're not supposed to show you this.'"

Globe and Mail, Tuesday, September 18, 1984, P. M3 Motion
of contempt launched by church The Church of Scientology of Toronto is asking the
Supreme Court of Ontario to find a Crown prosecutor and a lawyer with the
Ontario Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations in contempt of court.

Morris Manning, a lawyer acting for the church, said in an interview
yesterday that he has filed a motion asking for S. Casey Hill, a prosecutor
with the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General, and Jerome Cooper, a lawyer
with the Consumer Ministry to be jailed or fined.

The motion claims that Mr. Cooper misled Mr. Justice Jean-Charles Sirois of
the Supreme Court of Ontario into releasing to the Consumer Ministry documents
seized by the Ontario Provincial Police in a raid on the church's
headquarters.

The motion says that Judge Sirois was not told that many of the documents
had been ordered sealed by another Ontario Supreme Court judge while the
church contests the legality of the search warrant used by the OPP in the raid
last year.

The motion claims Mr. Hill, who represented the Attorney-General during the
search warrant hearings, "aided and abetted in the misleading of Mr. Justice
Sirois."

A yearing on the motion has been set for Jan. 17.

Rev. Earl Smith, president of the church, said the church was never
notified that the Consumer Ministry had appeared before Judge Sirois and
obtained permission to examine all the documents seized by the police.

He said the church only discovered that the ministry was examining them
when the ministry referred to them in letters after the church applied to be
allowed to perform marriages.

The church claims that some of the documents seized by the OPP are the
church's equivalent of confessional records and that others are covered by
solicitor-client privelege.

Globe and Mail, Saturday,
December 8, 1984, P. M3 Church's contempt motion dismissed by court by Murray
Campbell A Supreme Court of Ontario judge has dismissed a motion by the Church
of Scientology of Toronto that two Ontario
Government lawyers be cited for criminal contempt of court.

Mr. Justice John Cromarty ruled yesterday that lawyers for the Church
failed to provide evidence that Casey Hill, a Crown attorney, and Jerome
Cooper, a lawyer with the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations,
disobeyed court orders dealing with the confidentiality of Church documents.

Judge Cromarty ordered the Church to pay the costs the two men incurred in
hiring lawyer J. J. Robinette.

He also severely criticized the Church's lawyers for pressing their case
without giving the Government an adequate opportunity to explain its position.

The church had alleged that Mr. Hill and Mr. Cooper had violated a system
set up to protect the confidentiality of files seized in a March, 1983 police
raid on the Church's Yonge Street headquarters.

The Ontario Provincial Police seized about 250,000 documents as part of an
investigation into allegations of fraudulent Church activities.

No charges have yet been laid.

The Church gained several court orders sealing many of the seized documents
while arguments about their confidentiality were heard. But last August, it
discovered that another Ontario civil servant had gained access to documents
the Church alleged should have been subject to the sealing orders.

Rosemarie Drapkin, Ontario's deputy registrar-general, was granted access
to the documents on July 30 by Mr. Justice Jean-Charles Sirois of the Supreme
Court of Ontario as part of her investigation into an application by the
Church that it be allowed to perform marriages.

The Church as not informed of the court hearing at which Mrs. Drapkin was
given permission to see the documents. Nor was Judge Sirois informed that Mr.
Justice John Osler had ordered earlier in the summer that documents the Church
was claiming were privileged communications should remain sealed. The Church
alleged that Mrs. Drapkin had access to 89 documents held by the OPP,
including one hich Judge Osler had already ruled was confidential and should
remain sealed.

But Judge Cromarty said yesterday in a 67-page judgement that there was no
evidence that the documents seen by Mrs. Drapkin were ever placed under a
seal.

He noted the possibility of an innocent explanation of how Mrs.

Drapkin gained access to documents identical to those placed under seal,
saying that the system approved by the Church to seal documents made it
impossible to match contents of files.

He said in his judgement that neither Clayton Ruby nor Michael Code, the
two Church lawyers involved in the sealing process, had first-hand knowledge
of how it worked "and not one of the numerous Scientologists who were engaged
in that activity, and who, unlike the police, knew what documents were claimed
to be privileged and were copied, was called to give evidence about any of the
89 documents. That is a most eloquent omission."

He noted that there may have been multiple copies of certain documents in
the Church files at the time of the raid and that the copies given to Mrs.
Drapkin may have come from police copies of documents made before claims of
privilege concerning them were heard by the courts.

In awarding costs against the Church, Judge Cromarty criticized Mr.

Ruby, who "totally failed to continue the very proper course of conduct
which had been adopted" in earlier consultations about the documents.

He said Mr. Ruby chose to interrupt his good relationship with Mr.

Hill and not to seek an innocent explanation for the Drapkin papers.

He criticized Mr. Ruby for sending a "vicious letter" to Solicitor-General
George Taylor over the issue and for sending another letter that was "replete
with inaccuracies."

Cathia Riley, the Church's director of legal affairs, said yesterday that
the judgement did not surprise her and that having to pay court costs "is the
price of freedom."

Mrs. Riley said the Church wanted to prove that citizens had a right to
access to the courts to protect the integrity of court orders.

Morris Manning, a Church lawyer, argued that awarding costs against the
Church would be viewed as punishment for bringing the application against the
two Government lawyers and would deter other from launching similar suits.

Yesterday's judgement clears the way for a resumption of hearings into the
attempt by the Church to quash the search warrant used in the 1983 OPP raid.

In addition, the two sides will appear in court on Dec. 18 to determine
whether the OPP can retain possession of the 900 boxes of documents even
though no charges have been laid.

Globe and Mail,
Wednesday, December 19, 1984, P. M2 Charge details withheld in Scientology case by Murray
Campbell More than 21 months after a massive police raid, charges have been
laid involving the Church of Scientology of Toronto but the nature of
the charges and the names of those accused are not yet known.

Casey Hill, a lawyer with the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General,
told the Supreme Court of Ontario that a justice of the peace had signed
various summonses and warrants yesterday but that they had not been served on
those charged.

Mr. Hill disclosed the charges during a hearing yesterday intended to hear
a motion allowing the OPP to retain possession of about 250,000 documents
seized in a March, 1983 raid. The original court order allowing the OPP to
keep the documents had expired earlier this month and church lawyers had
planned to argue that police could not retain them unless charges were laid.

More than 100 OPP officers, some armed with sledge hammers and fire extinguishers, raided
the church's Yonge Street headquarters as part of an investigation into tax
exemptions claimed by the church. The police alleged that the church and
several employees defrauded the public with representations about several
church courses.

Mr. Hill stunned the church's lawyers when he announced that the warrants
and summonses had been signed yesterday morning by justice of the peace
William Turtle.

ALthough the charges have been signed by the justice of the peace, only
certain OPP officers, Mr. Hill, Mr. Justice John Osler and lawyer Clayton Ruby
know what is contained in them. Mr. Ruby was allowed to read the information
sworn by the OPP that forms the basis of the charges after he promised not to
inform anybody - including his clients, the Church of Scientology. He will be
released from his undertaking when the first warrant has been served, which
Mr. Hill said would be by tomorrow afternoon.

The OPP said last night that information on the charges would be released
today.

"This is utterly unprecedented," Mr. Ruby said yesterday after the highly
unusual court hearing adjourned for the day. "It's so unprecedented it makes
me laugh."

Earl Smith, president of the Church of Scientology of Toronto, said "this is
really bizarre. It's so secret - we're the clients and we can't even find out
what's going on.

"This reminds me of Nazi Germany," he added.

The process of laying the charges began on Dec. 1 when OPP
Detective-Sergeant Albert Clampini swore a nine-page document that contained
allegations about the church in front of Mr. Turtle at the Toronto (Don) Jail.

The information was sworn just one day before a court order allowing the
OPP to retain the 900 boxes of documents was set to expire.

Mr. Turtle held a private pre-inquiry hearing, involving Det-Sgt.

Clampini and Crown attorney Douglas Hunt, on Dec. 5 to 7 and Dec. 10.

The OPP officer was summoned by the justice of the peace yesterday morning
and told the various summonses and warrants have been signed.

Det-Sgt. Clampini testified about the charges yesterday after Judge Osler
ordered that he not be asked about the nature of the charges and any
individuals named.

He said about 75 per cent of the estimated 250,000 documents seized in the
police raid would be required to support the charges in court but that this
did not include about 75 boxes of material sealed under various court orders
while the court hears claims from the church that the material is confidential
because it involves legal or religious matters.

Mr. Hill said the charges relate to allegations contained in documents
filed by the OPP to secure the search warrant used to raid the church's
offices.

Earlier yesterday, the church failed in its bid to have Mr. Hill
disqualified from representing the government in hearings about the fate of
the documents or a related attempt by the church to quash the OPP search
warrant.

The church argued that Mr. Hill had a conflict of interest because of a
libel suit he is pressing against the church, its lawyer, Morris Manning, and
three news organizations, including The Globe and Mail.

The libel action results from a press conference held outside Osgoode Hall
last September by Mr. Manning at which he announced the commencement of
contempt-of-court proceedings against Mr. Hill over an alleged breach of court
orders sealing some of the seized documents.

The church motion to cite Mr. Hill and another lawyer for criminal contempt
as dismissed earlier this month by a Supreme Court of Ontario judge.

Mr. Ruby charged that because Mr. Hill is suing Mr. Manning and the church
for $800,000, he would have a "pecuniary interest" in harming the reputation
of the church before the libel case went to trial.

Judge Osler said the issue gave him "considerable difficulty" but he,
nevertheless, rejected the allegation of conflict. But Mr. Hill voluntarily
withdrew himself from any role in advising the OPP or representing the Crown
at any criminal trial involving the church.

Globe and
Mail, Thursday, December 20, 1984, P. M1 19 people charged in Scientology case Police,
provincial employees included by Murray Campbell The 19 people charged in
connection with an investigation of the Church of Scientology of Toronto include employees
of the Ontario Provincial Police, Metro Toronto Police, the RCMP
and the Ministry of the Attorney General, according to information the OPP has
sworn before a justice of the peace.

And the alleged stolen documents the church is charged with possessing
include photocopies of files belonging to legal firms, the Canadian Mental
Health Association, the Ontario Medical Association, the College of Physicians
and Surgeons of Ontario, Metro Toronto Police, the RCMP,
and the OPP.

Ontario Attorney-General Roy McMurtry, asked yesterday whether the charges
involving Metro and OPP documents indicated a lack of proper security at those
organizations said: "It's impossible to police every employee. We try to
maintain a high level of security, and I think we succeed."

Mr. McMurtry added there is no cause for public alarm; documents such as
personal health records and sensitive police information remain well
protected.

The OPP began serving summonses yesterday on the church and the 19
individuals for a series of charges - theft over $200, possession of stolen
documents and breach of trust.

But the OPP is refusing to release until today the names of those charged,
an unusual action that appears to break with common law tradition. The OPP
says not all have been served with their summonses, and a spokesman for hte
Attorney-General's ministry said it believes a Supreme Court of Ontario order
prohibiting publication of the names until the summonses have been served is
still in effect.

The charges are the culination of four years of work by a special unit
within the OPP's anti-rackets brnach, although the church has been watched by
the force since 1974 as part of its monitoring of cults.

The 19 people were ordered to appear in Provincial Court on Jan. 14 to
answer the allegations, which in most cases date from the mid-1970s.

Earl Smith, president of the church in Toronto, received the
summons on behalf of the church.

Mr. Smith said the 19 individuals charged were members of the church's
Guardian office an autonomous unit responsible for church security that arose
worldwide after 1966 and which was disbanded in 1980.

He said the Guardian office was often in conflict with official church
policy.

"I'm confident that the Church of Scientology as a religious
entity is going to come out of this all right," he said yesterday.

Clayton Ruby, a lawyer for the church, said that although the charges do
not contain any allegations of commercial gain by the church, which police
earlier said was the focus of their investigation, they are nevertheless
serious.

"It's less serious than it might be if it was a commercial operation, if
someone was doing something here for gain, but it's not true to say that they
are minor," Mr. Ruby said.

Cathia Riley, Director of the church's legal affairs, said none of the 19
individuals is currently a church employee, but about half are still members.

The charges come 21 months after a massive OPP raid in which about 250,000
church documents were seized. The OPP said at the time that they were seeking
evidence as part of an investigation into tax exemptions claimed by the church
and into the marketing of courses by the church.

OPP Detective-Inspector Douglas Ormsby, who has co-ordinated the
investigation since last May, said yesterday the charges were worth the time
and money spent on the investigation. He said the penalties provided in the
Criminal Code - 10 years for theft over $200 and for possession of stolen
documents, five years for breach of trust - indicate the seriousness of the
charges.

But he agreed that the charges did not reflect statements made by the OPP
in 1983.

"We were always looking at this particular area (in which the charges were
laid)," he said. "The other set didn't prove fruitful."

Det-Insp. Ormsby said that as far as he knew no other sets of charges were
forthcoming.

Mrs. Riley said the people charged were "renegades" whose "overzealous"
activities conflicted with the church's policy. She said they ceased to be
church employees two years before the March, 1983, raid.

Mrs. Riley said she believes the charges are a retaliation for the church's
role in exposing the activities of various U.S. and Canadian agencies,
including the Central Intelligence Agency.

She charged that Canadian authorities have been manipulated by the U.S.
Government to press an investigation because of the embarrassment the church's
exposés have caused.

Word of the charges came on Tuesday when Casey Hill, a lawyer with the
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General, told the Supreme Court of Ontario
that a justice of the peace had signed various summonses and warrants earlier
in the day.

Mr. Hill disclosed the charges during a hearing intended to hear a motion
allowing the OPP to retain possession of the 250,000 documents seized in its
raid. The original court orders allowing the OPP to keep the documents had
expired earlier this month and church lawyers had planned to argue that police
could not retain them unless charges were laid.

Mr. Ruby said he will not seek the return of church documents not needed as
evidence when the case resumes this morning. He said another motion to quash
the OPP search warrant because of what the church alleges are violations of
the Charter of Rights and Freedoms will still be fought.

Globe and Mail, Thursday, December 20, 1984, P. M5 Scientology probe took
over 2 years by Murray Campbell ALthough the Ontario Provincial Police had
been observing the activities of certain unrecognized religions - or cults -
since 1974, its investigation of the Church of Scientology intensified
with the formation in 1980 of a special unit of its anti-rackets squad.

Project 20 spent more than two years investigating the church before it
mounted a massive raid on its Toronto headquarters on
March 3, 1983.

More than 100 OPP officers, some armed with sledgehammers and fire extinguishers,
entered the Yonge Street building at 2:30 that afternoon and spent the night
searching offices on six floors. They removed about 250,000 documents in about
900 boxes before leaving at 11 a.m. the next day.

The church is recognized in Australia, the United States, Britain and
France and in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and the Yukon, but it
is not allowed to perform marriages - a chief element for recognition - in
Ontario. The church says it has about 6,500 members in Metro Toronto.

The OPP had got the search warrant needed for the raid by filing with Chief
Provincial Court Judge Frederick Hayes a 1,000-page document - called "the
most detailed document of its kind ever prepared in Canada" - making
allegations about the church's activities. This document alone took five
months to prepare with the assistance of the Ministry of the Attorney-General.

In a joint statement issued at the time, Attorney-General Roy McMurtry and
Solicitor-General George Taylor said: "The search and seizure of documents was
an integral part of an extensive police investigation .

. . into alleged offences of tax fraud, consumer fraud and conspiracy to
commit indictable offences when perceived necessary in the interests of the
Church of Scientology."

The statement said the OPP investigation was helped by Revenue Canada and,
in the United States, by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S.
District Attorney offices in Florida and Washington.

Six locked doors on the building's third floor were forced open with
sledgehammers "to prevent obstruction or the destruction of evidence through
movement of files and operation of shredders," the ministers' statement said.

"Before leaving, the OPP officers cleaned ashtrays and removed their
garbage and vacuumed the premises."

In the days following the raid, lawyers for the church sought successfully
to see the search warrant and to seal certain boxes of material for which a
claim of privilege was to be made.

Various court orders sealing some of the documents have been made since
then, and the original church motion to quash the search warrant used in the
raid is still before the court.

Globe and Mail, Friday,
December 21, 1984, P. M4 OPP pressed to identify 19 charged in Scientology probe by
Murray Campbell Lawyers with the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General say
they will press the Ontario Provincial Police to release the names of 19
individuals charged in connection with an investigation into the Church of Scientology of Toronto.

All day yesterday, the OPP refused to release the names of the accused
because they said not all of them had been served with a summons requiring
them to appear in court next month. The OPP had promised on Wednesday that the
names would be released in a press release yesterday.

The 19 former minor officials of the church, as well as the church itself,
were charged on Tuesday with theft over $200, possession of stolen documents
and breach of trust.

The summonses required them to appear in Provincial Court on Jan. 14 but
they were not arrested. There are also some warrants for the arrest of some
individuals although it is not clear how many.

The charges were laid as a result of information sworn in front of a
justice of the peace by OPP Detective-Sergeant ALbert Clampini on Dec.

1. According to this information, among the 19 charged are employees of the
OPP, Metro Toronto
Police, the RCMP and the Ministry of the Attorney-General.

The documents mentioned in the information include photocopies of files
belonging to the ministry, legal firms, the Canadian Mental Health
Association, the Ontario Medical Association, the College of Physicians and
Surgeons of Ontario, Metro Police, the RCMP, and the OPP. the OPP and the
ministry had been refusing to disclose the names because they said they were
subject to a court order prohibiting publication issued Tuesday by Mr. Justice
John Osler of the Supreme Court of Ontario.

Bruce MacDougall, a lawyer representing The Globe and Mail, said in an
interview that withholding from the public the names of accused served with a
summons contravenes the common law. He said that any document signed by a
justice of the peace as a public official becomes a public document once it is
executed.

He quoted Mr. Justice Brian Dickson of the Supreme Court of Canada who in a
1982 judgement upheld the maxim "where there is no publicity, there is no
justice."

The charges came to light on Tuesday when Casey Hill, the Crown lawyer who
has handled the Scientology investigation,
told the Supreme Court that a justice of the peace had signed various
summonses and warrants earlier in the day.

Mr. Hill was attending a hearing on a motion to allow the OPP to retain
possession of the 250,000 documents seized in a police raid on the Church of
Scientology's
headquarters in March, 1983. The original court orders allowing the OPP to
hold the documents expired Dec. 2 and the church's lawyers had planned to
argue that police could not retain them unless charges were laid.

Judge Osler allowed Clayton Ruby, a Church lawyer, to see the information
that forms the basis of the charges on the condition that he not tell his
clients. Mr. Ruby was released from his undertaking when the first summons was
served.

The church released a copy of the OPP document on Wednesday with the name
of the accused blacked out. Mr. Ruby has refused to divulge the names.

On Wednesday and yesterday, the police and the ministry said they could not
release the names until they were released from Judge Osler's order.

But the court reporter at the hearing said yesterday that a review of the
transcript showed clearly that there as no order from Judge Osler, only an
undertaking by Mr. Ruby.

Mr. Hill promised reporters twice yesterday that he would raise the matter
of the release of the names of the accused with Judge Osler but did not do so.
When asked why not after court adjourned until Jan. 14, he replied: "Oh jeez,
I forgot about it."

Asked what recourse reporters had to obtain the names without his aid in
rescinding any court orders, he said: "I assume the Globe has lawyers."

Albin Kostecka, a justice of the peace in the records office at Old City
Hall in Toronto, said
yesterday that he could not release the names of those accused served with
summonses because he had received no affidavits that they had been served.

The OPP said yesterday that 14 summonses had been served.

Late yesterday, Judge Osler met Mr. Hill, Crown attorney Bonnie Wein and
church lawyer Michael Code in his chamber at Osgoode Hall. Carol McCall, a
lawyer representing The Globe, and Brian Rogers, representing the Toronto Star, were allowed
to attend and received Mr.

Hill's assurance that he would telephone the OPP to let them know that the
names could now be released.

He said the manner in which the names are released was entirely up to the
police.

Globe and Mail, Saturday, December 22, 1984, P. M3
Names released in Scientology case List
includes 2 OPP employees Those charged were members of a special unit The
husband of a former president of the Church of Scientology of Toronto and two employees
of the Ontario Provincial Police are among the 19 people charged as a result
of a four-year OPP anti-rackets investigation.

After a three-day delay, the OPP released yesterday the names of 14 members
or former members of the church charged on Tuesday with one of more of three
charges - theft over $200, possession of stolen documents and breach of trust.

The OPP said it could release the names of only the 14 people who had been
served with summonses to appear in Provincial COurt on Jan. 14.

But late yesterday, the records office at Old City Hall in Toronto released the
information sword on Dec. 1 by an OPP officer before a justice of the peace,
which contains all 19 names. This document is the basis for the charges laid
this week. The church itself faces 17 charges.

Paul Charbonneau, 34, the husband of Caroline Charbonneau, who served as
the church's president for a year several years ago, is charged with
possession of stolen documents, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years
imprisonment.

Church spokesman Nicole Crelling said yesterday that Mrs. Charbonneau is
now working at the church's Los Angeles office while Mr.

Charbonneau remains in Toronto.

Charged on all three counts are: Janice Wheeler, 35, of Kitchener, Ont.,
identified as an employee of the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General;
Jaan Joot, of Toronto;
Jacqueline Matz, 37, of Toronto; an Marilyn
Belaire, 34, identified as an employee of Metro Toronto Police.

Most of the charges date from events in the mid-1970s. It is not known
whether those of the accused identified as being affiliated with an
organization are still employed there or what position they held.

The church says all those charged were members of its autonomous Guardian
unit, which as created in 1966 to deal with security and public relations
issues. The unit was disbanded in 1980 because it conflicted with church
policy, according to church officials. About half those charged remain members
of the church.

The documents mentioned in the information sworn before the justice of the
peace include photocopies of files belonging to the Ministry of the
Attorney-General, legal firms, the Canadian Mental Health Association, the
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, Metro Police, the RCMP and the
OPP.

The OPP and the Attorney-General's Mistry had been refusing to disclose the
names because they said they were subjedt to a court order prohibiting
publication that was issued Tuesday by Mr. Justice John Osler of the Supreme
Court of Ontario.

Lawyers representing The Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star argued in
Judge Osler's chambers on Thursday that the names should be released in the
public interest.

Crown attorney Bonnie Wein said yesterday that she informed the OPP early
yesterday morning that the court order banning publication was no longer in
effect. The names were released less than three hours later.

The charges came to light on Tuesday when Casey Hill, the Crown lawyer who
has handled the Scientology investigation,
told the Supreme Court that a justice of the peace had signed various
summonses and warrants earlier in the day.

Mr. Hill was attending a hearing on a motion to allow the OPP to retain
possession of the 250,000 documents seized in a police raid - involving 100
officers, some armed with sledge hammers and fire extinguishers - on
the church's TorontoToronto headquarters in
March, 1983.

The OPP said at the time that the raid was part of a two-year investigation
into tax exemptions claimed by the church and into allegations of fraud in
connnection with certain courses offered by the church.

The original court orders allowing the OPP to hold the documents expired on
Dec. 2 and the church's lawyers had planned to argue that police could not
retian them unless charges were laid.

A Supreme Court hearing on the fate of thousands of documents not needed as
evidence in these charges is expected to resume on Jan. 14.

The church is also continuing a legal battle to quash the search warrant
used by the OPP in the 1983 raid.

Globe and Mail, Tuesday,
January 15, 1985, P. M5 Crown attorney is predicting long trial in Scientology case
Defendants answer summonses by Murray Campbell A Crown attorney says he
expects a lengthy trial for the Church of Scientology of Toronto and 16 members and
former members charged as a result of a four-year police anti-rackets
investigation.

Douglas Hunt said yesterday that it is likely that those charged will stand
trial together. Sixteen of the 19 people originally charged - about about a
dozen lawyers - crowded into provincial court at Toronto's Old City Hall
yesterday to answer summonses served last month.

Three people did not appear in court, and Mr. Hunt said that there are
warrants outstanding against them.

The accused face one or more of three charges - theft over $200,
possessions of stolen documents, and breach of trust. The church itself faces
17 charges.

The charges arise from an investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police
that culminated in a massive police raid on the church's Toronto headquarters in
March, 1983.

Those charged will appear in court Feb. 28 to have a date set for their
trial.

Mr. Hunt said it is possible they could waive the right a preliminary
hearing and elect trial in provincial court, county court or the Supreme Court
of Ontario.

Mr. Hunt said he expected the trial to last at least three weeks but
probably longer.

Most of the charges date from events in the mid-1970s. The church says all
those charged were members of its autonomous Guardian unit, which was created
in 1966 to deal with security and public relations issues.

The unit as disbanded in 1980 because it conflicted with church policy,
according to church officials. About half those charged remain members of the
church.

According to information sworn by the OPP last month, the documents
involved in the charges include photocopies of files belonging to the Ministry
of the Attorney General, legal firms, the Canadian Mental Health Association,
the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, Metro Toronto Police, the RCMP
and the OPP.

The OPP information says that some of the people charged were employees of
the three police forces and the Attorney-General's Ministry. Mr. Hunt said
yesterday that those individuals worked as office clerks.

Unaffected by the criminal charges under way is the continuing battle by
the church to quash the search warrant used by the OPP nearly two years ago.

Lawyers for the church and the Crown appeared in the Supreme Court of
Ontario yesterday to resume the arguments in front of Mr. Justice John Osler
that began last June.

If the church is successful in quashing the search warrant, the charges
filed last month would be thrown into doubt because the documents needed as
evidence would have to be returned to the church.

Yesterday, church lawyer Mendel Green argued that the information sworn by
the OPP before Chief Provincial Court Judge Frederick Hayes nearly two years
ago deliberately misrepresented facts about the church. Judge Hayes used this
information to grant the OPP the search warrant used to raid the church's
headquarters.

Globe and Mail, Wednesday, June 19, 1985, P.
M1 Seizure of Scientology papers ruled
to have been done legally by Kirk Makin The search warrants that authorized
the largest seizure of documents in Canadian history were issued legally, a
Supreme Court of Ontario judge ruled yesterday.

Mr. Justice John Osler brought a trial of the Church of Scientology and several of
its officials on theft-of-document charges one step nearer with his
declaration that about two million documents seized by 100 policemen during a
20-hour raid in 1983 were legally seized.

But church officials immediately announced they will appeal the decision
because of a proposition within the judgement that defence counsel Clayton
Ruby called "completely novel and unheard of in any free country."

The proposition concerned whether the search warrants were sufficiently
specific to preclude a fishing expedition by the police.

(The general principle in such cases is that police must search and then
seize - not seize and then search.)

Mr. Ruby said the judge broke dangerously new legal ground in deciding
that, although the police could not fully analyze the material they seized,
the seizure was nevertheless legal because it was conducted in good faith and
irrelevant material has since been returned.

"It's really quite incongruous. For the first time in any free country, it
is all right for them to seize first," Mr. Ruby said. "The church feels this
is a serious erosion not only of their religious liberty but that of all
Canadians."

In his judgement, Judge Osler first affimed that "the description of what
is to be searched for must not be so broad and vague as to give the search
officers carte blanche to rummage through the premises of the target."

He then allowed that "quite obviously, no detailed analysis of the search
material could be made under those circumstances in such a way as to afford
the officers complete certainty that what they were searching came within the
authorized description."

In fact, some documents are still being analyzed, he said.

Despite that, he said he was "satisfied that the rule of search first and
then seize has been and is being followed as well as it can reasonably can be
in the circumstances."

Judge Osler noted the material that was laid before the judge who
authorized the search warrants amounted to about 1,000 pages and detailed a
range of relevant dates and classes of documents to be seized.

About 30 per cent of the church's internal documents were carted away
during the raid, which followed a 10-year investigation of its services and
taxation status.

"Their inability to retain this material obviously might cause grave
difficulty to the occupants of the office in carrying on their daily
legitimate activities," Judge Osler observed. "On the other hand, the
continued presence for days, weeks and possibly even months of a large number
of searchers in the office would cause even greater disruption."

Mr. Ruby remarked wryly tha the did not recall the church members being
asked which option they would prefer.

Judge Osler also rejected arguments that a search of the house of church
member Michael Zaharia was illegal. Church lawyers argued it was based on pure
speculation that documents had been moved there in a panic after word of the
impending raid was leaked to the church.

This argument and several others might affect the weight that can be given
to evidence at the trial and can be made before the trial judge, Judge Osler
said.

Michael Code, another lawyer for the church, said in an interview that the
prosecution has now assembled the documents it intends to use at trial.

They amount to just one box of a total of 850 that were seized, which
proves the church's point about the raid having been a fishing expedition, he
said.

In his decision yesterday, Judge Osler also rejected several other
arguments relating to imprecision in the applications for the warrants and the
inability of the judge who issued the warrants to understand arcane language
in church documents.

"The argument that the arcane language may well mean something quite other
than what appears on its face almost amounts to an assertion that because it
speaks in strange tongues, the church must be immune from investigation," the
judge said. "Such an argument lacks the element of reality."

Globe and Mail, Saturday, September 6, 1986, P. A10 Scientology wins battle
over access to documents by Drew Fagan The Church of Scientology has won a
major victory in its long-standing court battle to protect the confidentiality
of church documents seized by police.

Mr. Justice Samuel Hughes of the Ontario Supreme Court noted yesterday that
the church was not informed of an application by an Ontario civil servant for
access to some of the documents. He set aside the court order authorizing
their release.

"The ruling means that the Constitution will no longer permit the
Attorney-General's office to go behind the backs of a party to get secret
access to that person's documents in a secret judicial hearing," church lawyer
Clayton Ruby said after the decision.

Tom Marshall, the lawyer for the Ontario official, had conceded in court
that the judge who alloewd his client to see the documents had no opportunity
to consider the full background to the case, although not through the fault of
any crown attorney.

He said he would not oppose a decision that the order be set aside.

Judge Hughes said the issue of whether the civil servant had a legal
interest in the documents had needed to be adjudicated but was not.

"In the interests of justice, the Church of Scientology - whose
property was in [ILLEGIBLE] and which had been a party to the proceedings
sealing up the documents - should have been served" with notice of the
application, the judge concluded.

The church launched a battery of legal challenges in the wake of the
Ontario Provincial Police raid on its Yonge Street headquarters in 1983.

More than a million documents were seized as part of an investigation into
allegations of fraudulent church activities. Charges of possession of stolen
goods and breach of trust were later laid.

The church won a number of court orders sealing many of the documents while
arguments about the propriety of the seizure were heard.

But the church learned in August, 1984, that the Ontario official had
gained access to documents - some of which the church said should have been
subject to the sealing orders.

Rosemary Drapkin, Ontario's deputy registrar-general, had been granted
access to the documents in the preceding month as part of her investigation
into an application by the church that it be allowed to perform marriages.

The church was not informed of the court hearing before Mr. Justice
Jean-Charles Sirois.

As well, the judge was not told that Mr. Justice John Osler had already
ordered that documents the church claimed were privileged communications
remain sealed, and was considering whether all the documents should be
returned.

Since then, most of the documents have been ordered returned by Judge Osler
after a finding that the church's protections against unreasonable seach and
seizure under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms had been violated.

Mr. Ruby and Morris Manning, another church lawyer, said after the hearing
that the clear implication of Judge Hughes' decision was that the Church's
Charter right to fundamental justice had been denied.

Globe and Mail, Tuesday, July 26, 1988, P. A1 Scientology church offers
to aid poor if charges dropped by Peter Moon In what may be an unprecedented
legal manoeuvre, the Church of Scientology of Toronto has offered to
make substantial cash donations to community agencies working with the elderly
and the poor if criminal charges against it are dropped.

The offer was made yesterday in a letter written by the church's lawyer,
Clayton Ruby, and delivered to Ontario Attorney-General Ian Scott's office.

The church is charged with several counts of theft by church members of
photocopies of confidential documents from Ontario Government offices while
some of them were working for Government agencies. The documents all referred
to the Church of Scientology.

The charges resulted from the largest police raid in Canadian history.

One hundred police officers seized about two million documents in a 20-hour
raid on the organization's headquarters on Yonge Street, near Bloor Street, in
1983. The raid followed a long investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police
into the church's activities, a probe that included the use of undercover
officers within the church.

In addition to the church, 15 of its members were subsequently charged with
offences alleging the theft of photocopied documents. Four have pleaded guilty
and received absolute or conditional discharges. The others are awaiting
trial. The church's offer does not insist that charges against its members be
dropped.

The church waged a long, complicated challenge to the validity of the OPP
search warrant until last year, when the Supreme Court of Canada refused to
hear an appeal seeking to quash the warrant.

A preliminary hearing into the charges against the church, begun in March,
is to resume for two weeks in NOvember and to continue next February.

Cathia Riley, director of the office of special affairs for the Church of
Scientology in Canada,
said in an interview that the church has already spent $3-million challenging
the warrant and fighting the charges.

She said it faces at least another $1-million in legal costs if the
province insists on pursuing the charges against the church and its members.

Mr. Ruby said in an interview that he believes the province has spent at
least $15-million in legal and investigative costs.

Mrs. Riley said the church's offer to make charitable donations if charges
are dropped "is not a case of trying to buy off" the prosecution, but an
acknowledgement of the church's moral and ethical responsibility to the
community because of the actions of some of its members.

"The church feels it has made amdends," Mrs. Riley said. "We've done good
works in the community. It's time no that somebody takes a look at what this
church is doing."

Mrs. Riley said the church has been working with drug addicts, mental
patients, the elderly, children and others with special needs. She said it has
donated both money and the time of its members to community projects.

In his letter to Mr. Scott, Mr. Ruby said a church has never been
prosecuted on criminal charges in Canada or the United States.

"The prosecution of this church pits your Government against a particular
religion," Mr. Ruby wrote. "This is constitutionally impermissible."

"In the United States, similarly, there has never been a criminal
prosecution of a church. No doubt this is deliberate. The American
Constitution's guarantee of freedom of religion is similar in scope and
purpose to our own. In that respect, the development of religious freedom in
both countries has similar roots."

Mr. Ruby said in an interview that his letter to Mr. Scott is an attempt to
head off what would ultimately be a constitutional dilemma for the
Attorney-General, who is pursuing a prosecution begun by former
attorney-general Roy McMurtry.

"I think it's inappropriate for the state to be criminally prosecuting a
church, as opposed to individuals who committed criminal acts," he said. "I
have no difficulty with that, constitutionally, whether they are members of a
church or executives of a church of the Pope.

"But when you start taking on the institution of a church directly, I think
you raise problems of a constitutional dimension that are very troubling.

"So I'm trying to find a way around that by putting together an over-all
accommodation that brings into it consideration of the needs of the Crown . .
. and the needs of the public and the needs of this church, and the
constitutional needs of the country.

"It is inappropriate for this kind of constitutional clash to take place.
If it does, the courts will resolve it, but it is inappropriate for it to take
place."

In the letter to Mr. Scott, Mr. Ruby wrote that "the charges against the
church arise out of what is, practically speaking, ancient history. These acts
are alleged to have occurred 12 to 15 years ago and the last illegal act
allegedly to have taken place as long ago as 1976.

"Moreover, when the prosecution began, the principal focus of the then
attorney-general's concern was the theft of confidential information by the
Guardian's Office of the church. (The Guardians were a secretive division of
the church supposed to be responsible for public and other external
relations.) In the interval, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled . . . that
the theft of confidential information is no longer a criminal offence.

"Thus the main thrust of the Crown's concern was directed to a problem that
. . . now forms no part of the criminal law and should no longer be the
subject matter of a criminal prosecution.

"This change in the law in itself warrants careful consideration by you in
determining whether continuation of this prosecution is now justified. . . .

"The (church) will make substantial contributions to worthy community
agencies, unconnected with it, who work to assist the needy and the homeless.
We would like to have your views on what would be the appropriate amounts;
those views will be given great weight.

"This (church), though it has broken no criminal law, does not seek refuge
in any legal vacuum. We seek to rely on no technicality.

"But the constitutional dilemma created by this prosecution cries out for
steps which will avoid a confrontation between your government and religion.
We think these steps meet that need and thus serve the best interest for the
administration of justice."

The Church of Scientology was founded in
the 1960s by U.S. science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, who died in 1986. It
now claims seven million members in several countries. In Canada, there are
22,000 members ith 8,000 of them in the Toronto area, Mrs. Riley
said.

For many years, the Guardian's Office was a key group within the worldwide
church. The office was headed by Mr. Hubbard's wife, Mary Sue. In 1983, she
was sentenced to four years in jail after pleading guilty to directing a
conspiracy to steal U.S. government documents about the church.

The conspiracy involved stealing documents from the Internal Revenue
Service, the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's office, bugging an IRS
meeting at which the church's tax-exempt status was discussed, and planting
spies in the IRS and Justice Department.

Mrs. Riley said the Guardian's Office was a secretive group that operated
without any control from the main church. But she said the church accepts
moral and ethical responsibility for the excesses of members of the Guardian's
Office, which has since been disbanded.

She also said there is no precedent for charging a church in Canada with a
criminal offence.

She said the Unitarian Church has counselled its members to break the
Immigration Act to help refugees, but neither its members nor the church have
been charged.

And if a Jehovah's Witness member is charged with failing to provide
medical care for a child, she said, the church itself is not charged.

"It is not fair to continue prosecuting the Church of Scientology.

What the Crown wants is the church found guilty for the actions of some
individuals. That would only serve to harm the present-day practitioners and
the religion itself. We question what the motives are of the Crown in pursuing
this."

Globe and Mail, Wednesday, July 27, 1988, P. A1 Scientology charges
secular, Scott contends by John Allemang Ontario Attorney-General Ian Scott
has rejected a suggestion by the lawyer for the Church of Scientology of Toronto tha the Government
is infringing on a religion with its criminal prosecution of the church.

In a letter sent to Mr. Scott and handed out at a news conference held
yesterday by the church, lawyer Clayton Ruby said: "The prosecution of this
church pits your Government against a particular religion. This is
constitutionally impermissible."

Mr. Scott told reporters at Queen's Park: "The Court of Appeal has already
dealt with that point by saying that if any institution in our state that is
incorporated or that is individual commits what they call secular crimes, that
is, breaches the Criminal Code, they are liable to prosecution. The issue to
which he (Mr. Ruby) refers has already been decided."

The church and some church members are charged in relation to the theft
from Ontario Government offices of photocopies of confidential documents
related to Scientology.
Some of the church members were working for Government agencies at the time.

Mr. Scott was more guarded in his response to the unusual offer by the
church to contribute money and manpower to community services in Toronto as a way of
resolving the court case, which Mr. Ruby says has cost the church $3-million
and the Government $15-million.

Although he called the request unusual and unprecedented, Mr. Scott did not
reject it out of hand. He said his officials would be replying to Mr. Ruby
today.

Cathia Riley, a spokesman for the church, would not put a figure on the
amount the church was prepared to contribute, but she did not rule out a
figure in the millions.

The church has estimated that it will need at least $1-million more to
fight the charges it faces.

Ms Riley said the church has spent $50,000 on similar programs over the
past year.

Brian Prideaux, an official of the Anglican Church of Canada who works with
other faiths, said in relation to Mr. Ruby's statement that "no religious
group should be exempt from the laws of society."

Without referring to the merits of the particular case, he said that "the
Government has every right to prosecute the church."

He added that it would be up to the Government of Ontario "to prove that
these actions were undertaken on behalf of the church."

Katherine Swinton, a professor of law at the University of Toronto, said that "it is
undoubted that they can prosecute religious groups under the Charter of
Rights." The Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of conscience
and religion, but makes that freedom subject to what are called reasonable
limits.

Although the Church of Scientology refers to
itself as a church, and is accepted by some theologians as one, the Ontario
Ministry of Consumer and Commercial relations does not recognize marriages
performed by the church.

A ministry spokesman said an application by the church to perform marriages
has been neither accepted nor rejected.

Globe and Mail,
Thursday, July 28, 1988, P. A13 Charities cool to Scientologists' offer
Agencies disclaim knowledge of reason they were named by John Allemang The
Church of Scientology's
offer to help community social agencies, if the Ontario Attorney-General drops
criminal charges against the church, is meeting some resistance from the
groups the church proposes to help.

"Why would they name us?" asked surprised Kyle Rae, executive director of
the 519 Church Community Centre, which was mentioned as a possible beneficiary
of the offer. "It's bizarre. We've had no contact with them and no reason to
pursue their support."

The church, charged with theft of photocopied confidential documents from
Ontario Government offices, has offered 3,000 hours of community service and
an unspecified sum of money to atone for the actions of its members.

On Tuesday, Cathia Riley, a church spokesman, did not rule out a
contribution in the millions, but she said yesterday that a sum of that
magnitude was not realistic.

In a letter to Attorney-General Ian Scott, Clayton Ruby, lawyer for the
church, said the church was willing to undertake the complete renovation of an
inner-city community centre such as 519 Church.

Ms Riley added that the church as interested in helping Jessie's Centre for
Teenagers, Foodshare and the Stop 103 food bank.

Mr. Rae said 519 Church was an odd choice to propose for renovation because
it is about to build an extension to its building. He added, "Frankly, I
wouldn't want those people anywhere near the centre."

The centre is popular with Toronto's gay community,
and one user said:

"I know that the Church of Scientology people
discriminate against gays. They test people's personalities with that meter of
theirs, but they believe that gay people don't have personalities."

Ms Riley said that homosexuality "doesn't even come into it."

"There's no question about it on any test."

At Foodshare, executive director Richard Yampolsky said he would be happy
to take any money that came his way as the result of a court decision.

But, he added, "If they hope to extricate themselves from a case by paying
guilt money, we would not accept it."

He said the offer of money would "put the poor in an awkward situation as
being part of a legal argument between church and state."

The Church of Scientology has offered to
help Jessie's in the past, but was turned down. June Callwood, a spokesman for
Jessie's, said the church had proposed 1½ years ago that its members repair a
house that Jessie's owns on Madison Avenue.

Ms Callwood said Jessie's board of directors discussed the offer seriously
before turning it down.

"Our clients are teen-agers," she said. "We worried that they (the
Scientologists) might try to proselytize."

Ms Callwood said, however, that an offer of money would be "a different
situation."

The Church of Scientology already has
made donations of food to Stop 103, a "fairly small amount," said the food
bank's director, Rev. Rick Myer.

He said he would welcome Scientology volunteers "if
they came here just as a caring person and we knew there wasn't any effort to
proselytize."

The church's offer also seems to have left Mr. Scott less than
enthusiastic. In a letter to Mr. Ruby, the Attorney-General has rejected
arguments that it is constitutionally impermissible to flie criminal charges
against a church.

Mr. Scott's letter did not deal with the church's offer of community
service. Instead he advised Mr. Ruby that he was free to speak to the Crown
attorney about resolving the suit.

"We would like the case to return back to the forum in which it should be
conducted," a spokesman for Mr. Scott said.

Globe and
Mail, Friday, July 29, 1988, P. A13 Scott attacked over Scientology case by John
Allemang A Presbyterian minister and professor of religious studies has called
Ontario Attorney-General Ian Scott an atheist and compared the prosecution of
the Church of Scientology to Nazi
attacks on the Jews.

Speaking yesterday at a press conference organized by the Church of Scientology, Rev. Herbert
Richardson said Mr. Scott intends to eliminate the Church of Scientology by involving
it and its leadership in criminal proceedings.

The Church of Scientology and some of
its members are charged with theft in connection with photocopies of
confidential documents taken from Government offices.

In a wide-ranging and impassioned denunciation, Mr. Richardson, a professor
at St. Michael's College, also suggested that the Government used agents
provocateurs to create a case against the church. He likened the criminal
charges to the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II.

"The way you try to limit and destroy churches," he added, "is that you go
after the leadership and the leadership structure. That's exactly the focus of
these attacks by Mr. Scott."

An aide to Mr. Scott said that he did not wish to answer Mr.

Richardson's criticisms. He added that Mr. Scott is a Roman Catholic and
maintains close ties with St. Michael's College, of which he is a graduate.

Cathia Riley, spokesman for the Church of Scientology, said that
"Mr.

Richardson's analogies aren't necessarily our views." But she said she
agreed with him on the subject of religious freedom.

The press conference yesterday was part of the Church of Scientology's efforts to
describe the prosecution as an unprecedented involvement of the state in
religious affairs. Mr. Scott has denied this, saying the Court of Appeal
distinguishes breaches of the Criminal Code as secular crimes that can leave
an institution open for prosecution.

Mr. Richardson said "the Attorney-General has no power to know or judge in
these matters." He said that the church acknowledged a moral responsibility
for the action of its members, but not a legal responsibility.

Russell Miller, a British journalist, said in an interview that Scientology exhibits the
behaviour of a cult and not the behaviour of a church.

He is the author of The Bare-Faced Messiah, a critical biography of Scientology's founder, L.
Ron Hubbard. The Church of Scientology has brought
lawsuits involving the book in Canada, the United States, Great Britain, and
Australia. The suits do not dispute the veracity of the book, Mr. Miller said,
but instead charge him with breach of copyright or breach of confidence.

Globe and Mail, Friday, October 12, 1988, P. A16 Church
lawyer alleges ministry bias by Kirk Makin Ontario Premier David Peterson has
been asked to appoint independent lawyers to prosecute the Church of Scientology, after
allegations that the Attorney-General's Ministry is caught in a conflict of
interest.

Lawyers for the church also asked the provincial auditor yesterday to
examine the propriety of the ministry's having financed a civil suit launched
by one of its own lawyers against the church and several media outlets.

Lawyers Clayton Ruby and Marlys Edwardh told a news conference the ministry
has actively hidden the fact that it is paying for Crown counsel Casey Hill's
libel suit.

The lawsuit, launched in 1984, has cost at least $47,000 so far. a Ministry
memo acquired under freedom of information legislation indicates Mr. Casey
Hill will reimburse the ministry only if he wins his lawsuit.

In another memo distributed at the news conference, a senior ministry
official discussed charging the bills to "some general fund within the
ministry that should not be identified with the offices where these
individuals work."

The church lawyers said the "secret" financing of the suit creates an
intolerable conflict of interest which renders the ministry incapable of
continuing the criminal prosecution.

"There has never been a case where an attorney-general's office had a
financial stake in a lawsuit against anyone else they were prosecuting," Mr.
Ruby said yesterday. "Not in Ontario, not in Canada, not anywhere. It is just
not done. It is a shocking situation.

"It is important that somebody prosecuting does not have any animus, any
bias, or any interest in hurting or destroying the accused."

Mr. Ruby said the Crown office faces numerous discretionary decisions
during a criminal case. Hoever, its impartiality is tainted by the appearance
that it now has something at stake in the outcome of these cases.

Mr. Hill previously helped prosecute the Church of Scientology for theft of
photocopied documents from Ontario government ministries.

Several of its members also face charges in connection with the alleged
thefts. The charges are at the preliminary hearing stage.

"The whole object of the thing is to have a free ride," Mr. Ruby said
yesterday. "If they win, there is a windfall. If they lose, the taxpayers will
pay. Why shouldn't they be like anyone else?"

In a letter to Attorney-General Ian Scott released yesterday, Mr. Ruby
wrote: "You cannot sue and prosecute at the same time. It creates not merely
the appearance of bias, but actual bias."

Mr. Ruby told reporters that Mr. Hill has refused, during examinations for
discovery in the lawsuit, to answer questions about the financing of his case.

Globe and Mail, Friday, November 25, 1988, P. A3
Scientologists protest charges against church by Deborah Wilson About 35
members of the Church of Scientology held a
demonstration outside the Ontario Legislature yesterday to protest against
criminal charges against the church.

The church and some of its members are charged with theft of photocopied
confidential documents from Ontario government offices.

The Toronto
protesters displayed a banner that said, "Real criminals go 'Scott'-free," a
reference to Attorney-General Ian Scott and several former senior church
members who have been given immunity in the case in return for their testimony
against the church, according to spokesman Earl Smith.

Mr. Smith said the group objects to what he described as unprecedented
plans to prosecute a church rather than individuals.

"We're really trying to get Mr. Scott and Mr. Peterson to understand that
when you prosecute a church, you're prosecuting a religion," Mr.

Smith told reporters. He said church members have recently been holding
protests about once a week to try to persuade the Ontario government to
reconsider the idea of charging the church itself.

"Charging the whole church with the actions of a few people is wrong,"

he said. "No church in the history of the English-speaking world has ever
been charged criminally or prosecuted."

Mr. Smith said a church offer last July to donate members' time and money
to community social agencies, if charges against the church were dropped, was
part of that effort to draw attention to the situation.

"That's all over with," Mr. Smith said of the offer.

Mr. Smith said bias against the church by the Ministry of the
Attorney-General was to blame for the charges. He said the impression of bias
in the ministry is supported by a confidential memo, obtained by the church
under freedom-of-information legislation, that revealed the ministry is paying
costs of a civil suit by one of its own lawyers against the church and several
media outlets.

"The Attorney-General's office gives immunity to the people we kick out,
expel from the church, for actions that we felt were going against church
policy," Mr. Smith said. "They're more or less the directors in the case.
They're getting away while the junior members are being prosecuted."

Globe and Mail, Friday, April 21, 1989, P. A10
Scientologists lose privacy appeal Canadian Press The Church of Scientology lost another
round yesterday in a long-running legal effort to keep religious confessions
out of the hands of police and prosecutors.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a decision released without comment,
refused leave to appeal for the church and 120 members who wanted to overturn
an Ontario Court of Appeal judgement that went against them last December.

The decision means the appeal judgement will stand, and police will not be
required to return written confessions the church had argued were confidential
communications between priest and penitent.

The issue arose when Ontario Provincial Police, acting on warrants alleging
possible tax fraud, raided the Toronto premises of the
church and the home of one member in 1983, seizing more than 850 boxes of
files, books, correspondence, and other documents.

A variety of charges, including theft, possession of stolen property and
breach of trust, were later laid against the church and several members.

The charges relate in part to the theft of confidential documents from
Ontario government offices.

Church lawyers initially tried to quash the search warrants and have all
the material returned.

After the courts rejected that effort, the lawyers argued on narrower
grounds that some 2,000 documents consisting of religious confessions should
be returned.

The court decisions so far have centered on pre-trial issues such as the
proper rules for issuing search warrants and detaining property during police
investigations.

Four of 19 people charged have pleaded guilty and received absolute or
conditional discharges.

Trials have not yet been held for 15 others and for the church itself.

The Church of Scientology, founded by
the late American science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, claims seven million
members in several countries, including 22,000 members in Canada.

Globe and Mail, Saturday, September 22, 1990, P. A7 Church
to stand trial Scientologists face theft charges The Church of Scientology of Toronto and nine of its
members have been ordered to stand trial in a marathon case that began with
the seizure of documents in a police raid in 1983.

Judge William Babe of the Ontario Court's Provincial Division ordered the
church and the nine members yesterday to stand trial on 11 counts of theft and
breach of trust after preliminary hearing that lasted more than two years.
They are set to appear in court on Oct. 11 to set a date for the trial.

Clayton Ruby, lawyer for the church, has filed an application with the
Ontario Court's General Division asking that the case be dropped because of an
unreasonable delay in proceeding with the charges, which were first laid in
1984. Mr. Ruby has also asked that the committal to trial be quashed because a
religion and all of its members should not be forced to stand trial as a
corporation.

The charges are related to the alleged theft of photocopied confidential
documents from Ontario government and private offices.

The church, which claims seven million members world-wide and 7,000 in
Southern Ontario, says such a prosecution of a church threatens the freedom of
religion.

Globe and Mail, Monday, June 17, 1991, P. A7
Freedom of religion to be tested in court Michael Valpy The proceedings
against the Church of Scientology and certain
members of its flock began with a police raid on its Yonge Street offices
March 3, 1983.

It was not until 1984 that police laid charges - 11 counts of theft and
breach of trust against the church and nine of its members. Keep this fact in
mind: The church as a corporation was charged, as well as its adherents.

The charges relate to theft of photocopied documents from private and
provincial government offices.

The preliminary hearing began in 1988. It was 1990, more than two years
later, before it ended - with the church and its members committed for jury
trial.

The road to justice in the Scientology case is still
not a freeway.

The courts now have to rule whether charging the church violates the
Charter's guarantee of freedom of religion - a fascinating issue that will be
argued in Toronto
today.

Unfortunately, it is a debate that is not going to be heard. At the request
of both defence and Crown counsel, a judge has banned publication of arguments
in advance of the jury trial. Maybe our grandchildren will be able to tell us
the final outcome.

In the past in Canada, all sorts of people have been charged with
committing offences in the course of folloing the precepts of their particular
faith or sect. Hoever, the church to which they belong was not charged.

For example, Jehovah's Witnesses, as a religious organization, forbid blood
transfusions even when it is known that death might result.

People who are Jehovah's Witnesses have been charged with negligently
risking the lives of individuals in their care by refusing to allow them to
have blood transfusions. But the religious organization that counsels this
behaviour has not been charged.

Similarly, individual Witnesses were prosecuted during the Second World War
for resisting conscription. But, again, there were no proceedings against the
organization that counselled and advocated resistance.

Mormons - or members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints -
have been charged ith polygamy. But the church has never been charged with
advocating it. And, indeed, there are Mormon sects that continue today to
counsel polygamy.

Moreover, there are mainstream Christian churches that have advocated civil
disobedience against laws and regulations deemed to be unjust.

Members of those churches have risked prosecution. No one in officialdom
has moved to charge and prosecute the churches.

What makes the issue to intriguing is that, on the face of it, if the court
says it is okay to prosecute a church as a corporation, is the door then
thrown open for the courts to begin decreeing what are acceptable and
unacceptable tenets of faith?

On the other hand, are there no limits to Canadian toleration of
organizations that advocate illegal acts - alleged child abuse among so-called
satanic cults, for example - in the name of religious belief?

Or is Canadian society happy to tolerate the existence of organizations -
calling themselves religious - that are believed to psychologically assault
people?

Which leads us to the next question, of whether we accept that some
organization is capable of directing individuals to do wrong.

And if we start talking about the sorts of limits we want on religious
organizations, is there an implication here that the courts are being asked to
decide what is a bona fide religion?

The legal, social and moral ramifications of the case undoubtedly are more
complicated and of much greater profundity than I've outlined here.

But they certainly underscore a truth. In a country where there are fewer
and fewer common histories - hence, fewer tribal rules - Canadians
increasingly are looking to the law and courts to be the carriers and
determiners of common values.

Globe and Mail, Saturday,
October 5, 1991, P. A9 Lawyer awarded $1.6-million for libel Decision against
Church of Scientology
largest of its kind in Canada by Thomas Claridge A senior Ontario Crown
attorney has become the recipient of the largest libel award in Canadian
history.

An Ontario Court jury deliberated only about six hours before concluding
that Casey Hill should receive a total of $1.6-million in general, aggravated,
and punitive damages from the Church of Scientology and Toronto lawyer Morris
Manning.

Financed by the Ontario government, the lawsuit was launched in 1984 after
Mr. Hill and another government lawyer were cleared of criminal contempt
charges initiated by the church. The charges involved allegations that the two
lawyers helped get a court order that permitted Ontario's registrar general to
see church documents that a judge had ordered sealed after they were seized in
a 1983 police raid on Scientology'sToronto offices.

The lawsuit initially named as additional defendants Canada's two
television networks and The Globe and Mail. They reported on a press
conference at which Mr. Manning, representing the church, disclosed the
contempt proceedings. The media defendants reached an 11th-hour settlement,
terms of which included an apology read in court and payment of $50,000 toward
Mr. Hill's legal costs.

Sources close to the case said negotiations toward a similar settlement
covering the church and Mr. Manning foundered with the parties only $5,000
apart - with Mr. Hill's lawyers seeking $180,000 and the defendants offering
$175,000.

The main issues in the five-week trial, before Mr. Justice Douglas
Carruthers of the court's General Division and a six-member jury, were whether
Mr. Hill had been defamed and, if so, the appropriate award for damage to his
reputation. Financial losses were not alleged.

In the jury award Thursday, the church and Mr. Manning were made jointly
responsible for $300,000 in general damages for pain, suffering and loss of
reputation. The church alone was held liable for $500,000 in aggravated
damages and $800,000 in punitive damages.

In addition to the $1.6-million, the defendants face paying Mr. Hill's
legal bills and interest on the $1.6-million that will run from Sept.

17, 1984, the day Mr. Manning held his press conference.

The level of interest charges and costs will be set by Judge Carruthers.
The pre-judgement interest alone is likely to exceed $2-million.

The highest previous jury award in a Canadian libel action was made in
1984, when CTV was ordered to pay a total of $933,000 in damages to Walker
Bros. Quarries Ltd. in connection with a W5 episode that suggested the company
was allowing a quarry near Thorold, Ont., to be used as a storage site for
toxic wastes. Two years later, the Ontario Court of Appeal quashed the award
as unreasonable but upheld an award of $25,000 to the company's president.

The highest libel award upheld on appeal was one of $135,000 to Gerald
Snyder, a former Montreal councillor who sued the Montreal Gazette over an
article published in 1975. Pre-judgement interest over the case's 13-year
history pushed the final cost to the Gazette to nearly $310,000. The next
highest award on record was $125,000, won by Richard Vogel, a former British
Columbia deputy attorney-general, against the CBC in 1982.

In announcing plans to appeal the case, the church yesterday denounced the
outcome as a "travesty of justice." Rev. Heber Jentzsch, international
president of the Los Angeles-based sect, said the jury was "incited into such
an action by the court keeping out and refusing to allow church counsel to
enter defence evidence of the fact that Hill's legal fees were paid by the
province, and secondly the fact that the confessional materials between a
parishioner and his minister were broached."

Rev. Earl Smith, vice-president of the Church of Scientology of Toronto, said an appeal
would be filed as soon as possible.

Under terms of a 1988 agreement, the government committed itself to
reimburse Mr. Hill for costs incurred in pressing the libel action and the
plaintiff gave an undertaking to reimburse the government in the event of an
out-of-court settlement or a court award in his favour.

Globe and Mail, Thursday, March 12, 1992, P. A13 Scientology libel loss
confirmed Judge rejects request to reduce $1.6-million award to Crown lawyer
by Thomas Claridge Canada's costliest libel loss became even costlier
yesterday when an Ontario Court judge not only confirmed a $1.6-million jury
award but tacked on legal fees and about $560,000 in interest.

In a written decision, Mr. Justice Douglas Carruthers rejected arguments by
lawyers for the Toronto-based Church of Scientology and lawyer
Morris Manning that he should reduce the jury award to S. Casey Hill on the
grounds that it was unreasonably high.

Judge Carruthers of the Ontario Court's General Division said he did not
consider the fact that the lawyers now wanted him to fix the damages as
amounting to a defence consent "to take the case from the jury and proceed on
my own."

Noting that both defendants had initially sought a jury trial and resisted
motions by Mr. Hill's lawyers to discharge the jury, the judge said that with
the verdict "now in hand, there has been a complete change in the parties'
respective views of the jury's participation in the trial."

The judge also observed that the jury award was made despite the fact he
had not advised the jurors that they could award damages on a "substantial"
basis.

He also dismissed a motion by the Scientology organization
to dissolve an injunction made after the trial that prohibited any repetition
of the libel.

Observing that the jury had decided that an $800,000 award of punitive
damages was needed to punish the organization for defaming Mr. Hill, a senior
Crown lawyer, Judge Carruthers said that within 24 hours of the verdict the
organization had "republished the libel" in a news release announcing plans
for an appeal.

Explaining his decision to issue the injunction, the judge said it was
"reasonable to conclude that no amount awarded on account of punitive damages
would have prevented or will prevent the Church of Scientology from
publishing defamatory statements about the plaintiff."

The libel action, underwritten by the Ontario government, was launched in
1984 after Mr. Hill and another government lawyer were cleared of criminal
contempt charges laid by the Church of Scientology. The charges
dealt with a court order that permitted Ontario's Registrar-General to peruse
Scientology documents
that a judge had ordered sealed after they were seized in a 1983 police raid
on the organization's Toronto headquarters.

The lawsuit initially named The Globe and Mail and Canada's to television
networks as co-defendants, on ground they had reported on a news conference at
which Mr. Manning, representing the Church of Scientology, disclosed the
contempt proceedings. The media defendants reached an 11th-hour settlement,
terms of which included an apology read in court and payment of $50,000 toward
Mr. Hill's legal costs.

In his decision, Judge Carruthers said he learned after the trial that the
Scientology
organization had also been offered an out-of-court settlement involving
payment of $50,000 in damages and $85,000 toward the plaintiff's legal bills.

"As matters now stand, it would not be rational to think otherwise than
that the defendants would have been well advised to have accepted the offer to
settle."

Under the terms of a 1988 agreement, the government committed itself to
reimburse Mr. Hill for costs incurred in pressing the libel action, and the
lawyer gave an undertaking to reimburse the government in the event of either
an out-of-court settlement or an award in his favour.

The highest previous libel award in a Canadian libel action came in 1984,
when the CTV Television Network was ordered to pay $933,000 in damages to
Walker Bros. Quarries Ltd. in connection with an episode on the program W5
dealing with a company quarry near Thorold, Ont., and toxic wastes. That trial
was also presided over by Judge Carruthers.

In 1986, The Ontario Court of Appeal quashed the award as unreasonable but
refused to substitute its own award, instead ordering a new trial, which has
not yet taken place.

Globe and Mail, Wednesday, April 22,
1992, P. A13 Ruby outlines case for Scientologists Defence lawyer suggests
from people accused as breach-of-trust trial opens by Thomas Claridge The
successful prosecution of senior members of the Church of Scientology in the United
States was held out yesterday as a basis for acquitting five Scientologists
and the Toronto
affiliate of criminal breach-of-trust charges.

In an opening address to an Ontario Court jury, defence lawyer Clayton Ruby
said the Ontario and U.S. charges both involved improper activities during the
1970s by the organization's Guardian's Office.

The office was under the direction of Mary Sue Hubbard, wife of Scientology founder L. Ron
Hubbard.

Mr. Ruby said that in the United States, authorities had alleged that Mrs.
Hubbard and 10 senior members of the British-based Guardian's Office Worldwide
were involved in a conspiracy to steal U.S.

government documents about Scientology. (All were
convicted. Mrs.

Hubbard was sentenced to four years in prison and fined $10,000 [U.S.] for
her role in the conspiracy.)

But the lawyer told the jury that the Ontario charges were laid against the
Toronto organization
itself and individuals ho did not hold senior positions in the Guardian's
Office.

At one point, drawing criticism from Mr. Justice James Southey for
delivering what "sounds like a sermon on Scientology," Mr. Ruby
used organizational charts to underline assertions that until the early 1980s,
the Toronto
organization had no control over operations of the Guardian's Office.

Earlier, prosecutor James Stewart said his star witness will be the man who
was once the senior Guardian's Office official for Canada.

Bryan Levman, who is expected to testify today, was described by Mr.

Stewart as a man who became interested in Scientology as a
20-year-old student, and quickly rose through the ranks to become deputy
guardian for Canada.

"He was in a position to tell you what was going on," the Crown prosecutor
said.

He said Mr. Levman will tell the trial that he left the position after a
trip to Britain to discuss differences with the Guardian's Office Worldwide,
then run by Mrs. Hubbard. Although Mr. Levman continued as a Scientologist in
good standing, he was drummed out of the organization in February, 1982.

Mr. Stewart said he expects the witness to describe how the organization
decided to infiltrate the Ontario Provincial Police in 1974. He said four
other former Guardian's Office officials will provide similar evidence on
espionage activities within the RCMP, Metropolitan Toronto Police and the
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General.

One of the four, Emile Gilbert, was described by the prosecutor as a former
Roman Catholic Seminarian who turned to Scientology and eventually
joined the Guardian's Office in Toronto, marrying one of
its officers. He, too, was later expelled from the organization.

Mr. Stewart said that the jury will hear evidence that infiltration of the
Attorney-General's Ministry involved two Scientology "plants" who
worked together on obtaining information from government files.

Another proposed Crown witness, Metro Police Sergeant Barbara Taylor, is
expected to describe her role in a police counterintelligence operation. Mr.
Stewart said that as an undercover officer, she joined the organization and
wound up being hired by the Guardian's Office intelligence bureau.

Mr. Ruby, who is representing the Toronto organization along
with law partner Marlys Edwardh, told the jurors they would find themselves
standing "between church and state" on ground "that has been fought over for
centuries."

Although making no attempt to minimize the illegal activities, which he
described several times as crimes, the lawyer suggested the wrong people were
on trial.

He said that under the organization's arrangement, "the Guardian's Office
could give orders to the Church of Scientology, Toronto, but the Church of
Scientology, Toronto, could never give
an order to anyone in the Guardian's Office, no matter how low or how high."

Mr. Ruby said evidence at the trial will show not only that all
instructions for the espionage activities came from the Guardian's Office but
that all the information was all kept in the office, which could not be
entered by organization members except in the company of a Guardian's Office
member.

Describing the key prosecution witnesses as all "confessed liars and
criminals," the lawyer said all had received special training in how to lie
and had agreed to become Crown witnesses only on being guaranteed immunity
from prosecution.

He suggested that anyone "willing to lie, steal and cheat for the
Guardian's Office Worldwide" would be just as willing to lie in the witness
box.

The trial is expected to last about two months.

Globe
and Mail, Friday, June 26, 1992, P. A4 Scientology church
convicted on 2 counts by Thomas Claridge An Ontario Court jury found the
Church of Scientology
of Toronto and three of
its members guilty of breach-of-trust charges stemming from infiltration of
the Ontario government and three police forces in the 1970s.

The jury found the organization guilty on two counts and not guilty on
three others, and acquitted two individuals. Mr. Justice James Southey of the
court's General Division set aside Aug. 12 and 13 for sentencing.

The criminal charges followed a raid on the TorontoScientology headquarters
in 1983 that resulted in the seizure of thousands of documents. Although the
Church of Scientology
and nine members were committed to trial in the fall of 1990 on theft as well
as breach-of-trust charges, the Crown abandoned the theft prosecutions after a
ruling by Judge Southey that most of the seizures were unlawful.

The theft charges wound up being heard yesterday morning by a second jury,
empanelled simply to hear prosecutor James Stewart say that in view of the
judge's ruling he could not produce sufficient evidence to prove the
allegations. The jury retired briefly before returning acquittals on the theft
counts.

The unusual procedure was apparently adopted as a means of preserving the
Crown's right to appeal Judge Southey's ruling, which was based on a finding
that virtually all the seized documents were protected as confessional
materials.

The breach-of-trust charges were based on evidence, not challenged by the
defence, that members of the Scientology organization's
Guardian's Office infiltrated the government, RCMP, Ontario Provincial Police
and Metro Toronto
Police in order to learn whether the organization was being investigated. The
charges did not include any indication of the information being put to any
particular use.

The jury heard evidence from former Scientologists that the infiltration
led to elaborate spying activities, and that at one point the OPP sent its own
spy into the Guardian's Office.

Rev. Earl Smith, president of the TorontoScientology organization,
said last night that he regarded the jury verdicts as "really a victory."
Noting that the organization had been found guilty on only two of 12 charges
on which it had been committed, Mr. Smith added:

"ANd we're going to appeal that."

The two-month trial was preceded by months of legal arguments based on the
length of time taken for the matter to reach trial and assertions that the
prosecution of the organization as well as the individuals was an abuse of
process. Similar arguments are likely to be aired when the matter reaches the
Ontario Court of Appeal.

The defence team, headed by Toronto lawyer Clayton
Ruby, acknowledged the spying activities but contended that they had been
carried out primarily by former Scientologists who were testifying for the
Crown in exchange for immunity from prosecution. He also asserted that the Toronto organization had
no control over, or even knowledge of, the illegal activities.

Globe and Mail, Thursday, August 13, 1992, P. A13
Prosecution seeks $1-million fine in Scientology case by Thomas
Claridge A Crown prosecutor suggested yesterday that the Church of Scientology of Toronto should be fined at
least $1-million and three of its members should be jailed for breaches of
trust involving infiltration of the Ontario government and three police forces
in the 1970s.

Prosecutor James Stewart made the proposals in a brief opening statement at
a sentencing hearing before Mr. Justice James Southey of the Ontario Court's
General Division.

He suggested jail terms of six months for Jacqueline Matz as a senior
member of the organization's Guardian's Office, and sentences of 30 to 90 days
for Janice Wheeler and Donald Whitmore, who worked as Scientology operatives in
the Ontario Attorney-General's ministry and the RCMP.

The proposals brought an angry response from Scientology lawyers, who
argued that any fine should be nominal, and produced unaudited financial
statements showing that the Toronto body was already
deeply in debt, in large part because of the prosecution.

Lawyers Clayton Ruby and Marlys Edwardh told Judge Southey the organization
had acted quickly as soon as it learned of the illegal Guardian's Office
activities, launching an "Amends" program that required community service work
by former Guardian's Office members for charitable organizations not connected
with the Scientology
operation.

Describing the proposed $1-million fine as a penalty designed to "crush, to
destroy," Mr. Ruby said its imposition would amount to a violation of both the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Magna Carta of 1215.

The financial statements showed the Toronto group's assets as
having shrunk to about $3.5-million from $5.4-million in 1991, while its
liabilities had risen to nearly $9.6-million from about $8.2-million.

Most of the deterioration appeared to be as the result of legal expenses.

Noting that the organization had been found guilty of only two of the 12
charges it faced when the trial opened, Mr. Ruby argued that any fine would
have to be paid by the 7,000 adherents, only 300 of hom are "active members."
He said the operation's only real asset is its building at 696 Yonge St.,
recently appraised at $6-million.

The hearing is expected to end today.

Globe and Mail,
Friday, August 14, 1992, P. A11 Scientology sentencing
adjourned overnight by Thomas Claridge Sentencing of the Church of Scientology of Toronto and three members
was adjourned overnight yesterday when a defence lawyer challenged Crown
assertions that the court should ignore the organization's claims of being
poor.

Lawyer Marlys Edwardh said she needed the time to obtain copies of court
ruling she said establish that fines against corporations should relate to the
size and wealth of the corporation charged, rather than on its relationship to
other corporations.

Although granting the adjournment, Mr. Justice James Southey of the Ontario
Court's General Division expressed skepticism that close legal precedents
would be found and said he wanted to pass judgement today.

Crown lawyer James Stewart's contention that Scientology could pay the
$1-million fine he had recommended was based in part on testimony at a
pre-trial hearing and the fact that financial statements showing the Toronto organization with
liabilities of nearly $9.6-million and assets of only $3.5-million had not
been audited.

Mr. Stewart cited testimony at the earlier hearing as confirming that the
U.S.-based parent Church of Scientology helped defray
costs associated with the 7½-year legal battle that ended in June with a jury
finding the Toronto
organization and members Jacqueline Matz, Janice Wheeler and Donald Whitmore
guilty of criminal breach of trust.

All the convictions related to espionage activities by Scientology's Guardian's
Office in the 1970's that involved infiltration of the Royal Canadian Mounted
Police and the Ontario Attorney-General's ministry by Scientology operatives.

Although the offence carries a maximum penalty of five years in
penitentiary, Mr. Stewart acknowledged a fine was the only possible penalty
for a corporation and the relatively minor roles played by the individual
accused did not justify long prison terms.

In the end, he suggested Mrs. Matz be given a prison term of three to six
months and the other two accused be fined or jailed for up to 90 days. He
acknowledged four co-accused had earlier been fined or given discharges after
entering guilty pleas.

Mr. Stewart cited a press release issued on the day of the jury verdict as
showing the organization is trying to minimize the significance of the verdict
"to the greatest extent possible."

The release announced plans to appeal the verdict and noted the
organization had been convicted on only two of 12 charges to which it had been
committed to trial.

The Crown lawyer suggested a nominal fine would only reinforce the myth
that Scientology was
not responsible for the criminal activities of its members.

Globe and Mail, Saturday, September 12, 1992, P. A1 Church
of Scientology fined
$250,000 for espionage Judge rejects jail sentences for individuals who
infiltrated government in '70s by Thomas Claridge The Church of Scientology of Toronto was fined $250,000
yesterday for criminal breaches of trust involving espionage activities nearly
20 years ago within two police forces and the Ontario Attorney-General's
Ministry.

The sentencing judge rejected a prosecutor's call for the imposition of
jail terms on individual participants in the activities. Instead, he levelled
fines totalling $9,000.

Mr. Justice James Southey of the Ontario Court's General Division said a
jury's verdict that the church was guilty of two counts of breach of trust
reflected a finding that the "directing minds of the church"

were involved in the illegal activities and a rejection of defence
arguments that the church and its Guardian's Office were separate entities.

Although admitting the financial statements submitted by the church showed
that its liabilities exceed its assets, Judge Southey rejected defence
arguments that he should levy only a nominal fine. He suggested at least part
of the $250,000 could be paid by "the mother church," the Church of Scientology of California.

Evidence at the trial showed the U.S. parent incorporated the Toronto church in 1969 and
contributed, through interest-free loans, toward the $7-million cost of
fighting the criminal charges. One Crown witness described the 1969
incorporation as designed to minimize the parent church's exposure to
lawsuits.

Noting that the Toronto church is run by
three appointed directors over whom the 7,000 parishioners had no control, the
judge described its structure as "completely undemocratic."

ALthough describing both the defence call for a nominal fine and the
Crown's proposal for a fine of at least $1-million as "extreme and
unsupportable," Judge Southey saved most of his criticism for the defence
position.

Rejecting a contention that the church had shown remorse for its role in
the affair, the judge suggested that in reality there was a continuing attempt
to blame individuals within the church for illegal activities that had been
carried out at the direction of senior Scientology officials.

The judge said he was satisfied the British-based Guardian's Office World
Wide was "subject to the control of founder L. Ron Hubbard and his wife, Mary
Sue Hubbard." He specifically refused to make any finding as to the extent
that Mr. Hubbard, who died in 1986, "directed or controlled the Guardian's
Office World Wide."

Although acknowledging the Guardian's Office was disbanded in 1983, the
judge noted this was after incriminating documents had been seized by the U.S.
Federal Bureau of Investigation and The Globe and Mail had published an
article in 1980 disclosing the fact that some of the documents had originated
within the Ontario Government.

Judge Southey also rejected defence arguments that a heavy fine was not
necessary in the absence of evidence of similar infiltration by other
religious groups.

Describing general deterrence as the principal factor to be applied in
sentencing, he said there was a need to deter any organization that might
contemplate placing "plants" in law-enforcement agencies. "It is not only
religious bodies that need to be deterred."

He did agree with the defence lawyer that the fine should take into account
the fact that the Toronto church had been
incorporated as a non-profit organization, that the activities were not
carried out for personal or financial gain and that the activities did not
lead to any significant interference with the administration of justice and
had long since stopped.

The church was fined $150,000 in connection with infiltration of the
Attorney-General's Ministry in 1974 and 1975 during which Scientologist Janice
Wheeler sent copies of some secret documents to the Guardian's Office and
allowed a member of the office to go through ministry files in an unsuccessful
attempt to find a file on Scientology.

The remaining $100,000 was in connection with similar activities in 1976 by
a Scientology operative
within the Ontario Provincial Police.

Jacqueline Matz, a former member of the Toronto Guardian's Office,
was ordered by pay a $5,000 fine at the rate of $200 a month for 25 months.
Ms. Wheeler and Donald Whitmore, described as a Scientology plant in the
Royal Canadian Mounted Police at Ottawa who memorized information from RCMP
files, were each fined $2,000.

Rev. Earl Smith renewed criticism of the Crown's decision to grant immunity
from prosecution to former Guardian's Office officials who agreed to testify
for the prosecution. He said that while those people had gone free, the
justice system had punished "innocent Scientologists for acts they neither
condoned or knew about."

He said it was the first time in the English-speaking world that a religion
had been put on trial for criminal offences.

"Never before has a church been tried for the alleged actions of a handful
of former officials."

In a similar vein, the Coalition for Religious Freedom and Justice said the
fine formed "a precedent for all time that money given in good faith for
charitable purposes can be hijacked by the state through legislation." The
coalition describes itself as an ad-hoc group comprising about 25 clergy from
several Christian denominations.

Globe and Mail, Thursday,
September 12, 1992, P. A15 BACKGROUNDER / Globe article triggered
investigation by OPP into organization's activities Illegal acts might have
gone undetected, judge says by Thomas Claridge TORONTO - A judge who
yesterday fined the Church of Scientology of Toronto $250,000 for
espionage activities carried out in the 1970s suggested the criminal acts
might have gone undetected were it not for a Globe and Mail article published
in 1980.

Mr. Justice James Southey of the Ontario Court's General Division said the
article triggered an investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police that
included counterespionage activities and led to a massive raid in 1983 and the
laying of charges in December of 1984.

The 2,310-word article by John Marshall was part of a series dealing with
the Church of Scientology published in
January of 1980. The Globe reporter had spent a week poring over documents
seized by the U.S.

Federal Bureau of Investigation in raids on the Washington and Los Angeles
offices of Scientology
in 1977.

Among the 33,000 documents released in December of 1979 after the
conviction and sentencing of nine senior U.S. Scientologists, Mr.

Marshall had found confidential memos from several Ontario government
offices.

One letter the reporter discovered was "from an RCMP officer in Ottawa to
the Ontario Provincial Police fraud squad in Toronto, which was
investigating complaints by parents of a teen-aged member of the cult.

The letter had an OPP stamp indicating it had been received March 3, 1979."

Although the FBI and OPP raids on Scientology were similar
in scope, the prosecutions that resulted were sharply different. The U.S.

prosecutions were only of individuals and let to guilty pleas that
minimized the adverse publicity. Ontario prosecutors decided to attempt the
more difficult task of prosecuting both individual participants and the Toronto church for
criminal breaches of trust.

In doing so, the Crown had to rely heavily on testimony of former senior
Guardian's Office officials, some of whom had been thrown out of the church
because of their involvement.

Evidence at the trial showed the espionage work was prompted by a widely
held belief in Scientology's hierarchy
that governments were out to destroy the new religious organization.

The illegal activities in Ontario have directly or indirectly cost Scientology about
$10-million in fines, legal fees, and jury awards.

In addition to $7-million the Toronto church hsa spent
fighting the criminal charges and the $250,000 fine imposed yesterday, the
church was hit by a $1.6-million libel award and substantial costs last fall
in connection with a private contempt-of-court prosecution of two Crown
lawyers.

The successful plaintiff, Casey Hill, had been assigned to head up an
investigation of Scientology and other
religious cults and was involved in drafting the search warrant used to raid
Scientology'sToronto headquarters in
March of 1983.

Despite the costliness of the legal battles, the church is appealing both
the libel and breach-of-trust verdicts.

Globe and Mail,
Friday, September 25, 1992, P. A29 Putting a church on trial by Al Buttnor
There is a significant story behind the recent trial of the Church of Scientology of Toronto, which ended in
the church's conviction on charges of criminal breach of trust and a fine of
$250,000.

This prosecution - in a case that has been going on for nine years, based
on events almost two decades old - represents the first time in the
English-speaking world that a religious organization has been put on trial by
the state for acts committed by some of its members. It sets a frightening
precedent for all Canadians who value religious freedom.

When the judicial system can, by convicting and fining a church, punish
every innocent member of a faith with a criminal taint because of the acts of
a small minority of members, every religious group is in danger.

There is also a broader fundamental principle here. A church corporation is
a legal fiction. It is something made up to provide a structure that houses
the religious community. Unlike General Motors, a church does not have owners
and shareholders, only members and individual parishioners.

The legal structure is established only to organize and provide facilities
for the practice of religion. Many churches and religious organizations do not
even take steps to incorporate.

The prosecution of this corporate body of a church pits the government,
with its massive resources, against one particular religion and its individual
parishioners. The impact is felt not by the corporate structure of that
church, but by its parishioners and adherents to the faith. This inevitably
brings the parishioners into disrepute in the community, disparages their
faith and encourages intolerance of it. This is not just.

Until early in this century, the Mormon Church advocated bigamy among its
members and performed bigamous marriages. The church was never prosecuted, but
its members were.

Jehovah's Witnesses forbid the use of blood transfusions even in cases
where they know that death will result, yet no one has ever charged the Watch
Tower Society, although numerous individuals have been charged. During the
Second World War, Jehovah's Witnesses advocated refusing to cooperate with the
draft. They organized resistance to it among the members and members were
jailed, but the church was never prosecuted.

In British Columbia, the Sons of Freedom Doukhobor Church ordered members
to burn down their own and other people's property. The individuals were
prosecuted, but not the entire church.

Today, we are seeing startling revelations concerning the criminal conduct
of some clergy of various mainstream religions, and the long-term neglect by
those organizations to deal with this conduct.

Despite the seriousness of these acts, none of the churches involved has
been charged.

That churches have not been prosecuted for the actions of their members or
officials appears to have reflected a fundamental policy choice rather than a
legal impediment to the actual laying of charge.

This policy has changed with the Church of Scientology of Toronto - and, in light of
the examples given, a double standard may even have been created.

The only way an organization can be punished under the criminal law is
through a fine. But with a church, who pays this? The innocent members. This
places a severe fiscal penalty on people whose sole "crime" is the enjoyment
of their faith. This drains the resources of the religious community as well
as its vitality.

The Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General has spent a reported
$15-million worth of taxpayers' money over the past nine years to pursue this
case. The ministry ignored the offers of senior church executives to help in
the prosecution of those individuals who were actually responsible for the
crimes committed.

The ministry and the Ontario Provincial Police went to the extent of
violating the constitutional rights of the Church of Scientology in conducting
their 1983 raid against the church. The Ontario Court of Justice found the
manner of search and seizure "unlawful" and said the police officers involved
did not act in "good faith".

This kind of effort and money is never spent on criminal prosecutions - not
murder, not rape, not embezzlement. There was something unique about this
case, a case against a church.

The bottom line is that we live in a country that has enshrined the concept
of religious freedom for all in the law, through the constitutional Charter of
Rights and Freedoms. But paper is not enough, and the social reality is
different. Concepts of religion vary from person to person. Prejudice exists
against new religious ideas, and the system, comfortable in its old ways,
attacks those who dare think they have a better idea.

All religious groups, whether new or old, need to be wary and alert and
willing to fight for their rights. We have. We hope society's resources will
be put to better use than targeting well-meaning organizations and their
innocent members who have had the integrity to right their own internal
affairs.

-------------------------------------------------- Al Buttnor is
public-relations spokesman for the Church of Scientology of Toronto.

Globe and Mail, Thursday, November 26, 1992, P. A10
Scientologists' offices mortgaged, court told Church accused of trying to make
Toronto operation
judgement-proof by Thomas Claridge The Church of Scientology was accused
yesterday of having tried to make its Toronto incorporation
judgement-proof in the wake of a jury's record $1.6-million libel award.

The accusation was made before a judge of the Ontario Court of Appeal by
Robert Armstrong, the Toronto lawyer who
represented Casey Hill, the senior Ontario Crown attorney who won what stands
as by far the largest libel award in Canadian history.

Mr. Armstrong told Madam Justice Hilda McKinlay that the sect's Los
Angeles-based international office was apparently responsible for more than
$6-million in mortgages placed on the Yonge Street offices of the Church of Scientology of Toronto within weeks of
the jury making the award on Oct. 3, 1991.

Noting that the building had recently been appraised at $6-million, the
lawyer asserted that the mortgaging, ostensibly to pay legal fees associated
with the libel case and a pending criminal trial, encumbered the Toronto organization's
assets "to the extent that there is essentially nothing left."

Mr. Armstrong said he first learned of the mortgages only in August when he
read news reports on a sentencing hearing held after a jury found the Church
of Scientology of Toronto and three
individuals guilty of criminal breaches of trust in connection with espionage
activities against police forces and the Ontario government.

The lawyer said that when he investigated the matter he discovered that one
of the mortgages, for about $3.1-million, was for legal bills from the firm of
TOronto lawyer Clayton
Ruby, $2.1-million of which he said "was money that was not paid or owed at
the time."

Asserting that Mr. Ruby was the perosn who first proposed that Casey Hill
be accused of criminal contempt, a proposal that led to fellow lawyer MOrris
Manning uttering words that the jury found libelous, Mr.

Armstrong said the lawyer who started it all and was a key defence witness
in the libel trial was being paid ahead of Mr. Hill.

"There is a certain bitter irony in this," he told the judge.

Asserting that the Yonge Street property was essentially debt-free before
the libel trial, the lawyer said three mortgages now registered against it
total about $10-million.

Judge McKinlay was told that all the mortgages involved loans made by Scientology organizations.

Mr. Armstrong's comments were made in the course of asking the judge to
require payment of the $1.6-million to his client or into the court pending an
appeal that is not expected to be heard before spring.

Kitchener lawyer Marc Somerville, representing the Church of Scientology, suggested his
client should be required only to preserve the status quo, by not permitting
any further encumbrances on the property and agreeing not to sell it.

He described the libel award as "the largest libel judgement in Canada by a
multiple of five."

Judge McKinlay said the suggestion of preserving the status quo would be
reasonable "if the horse hadn't already escaped from the barn."

Mr. Somerville said the international Scientology organization
"is not going to stop having a church in Toronto," adding that
there was "no indication it will not pay any judgement finally determined in
this matter."

But when he acknowledged that the case would in all likelihood wind up
before the Supreme Court of Canada, Judge McKinlay said she could see the
matter taking another five or six years and Mr. Hill then having to start a
fresh legal action to determine the validity of the mortgages.

The hearing continues today.

Globe and Mail, Friday,
December 11, 1992, P. A20 Scientologists agree to settlement Church to
discharge mortgages, pay defamed lawyer's legal costs by Thomas Claridge
Concerns that the Church of Scientology had made its
Toronto incorporation
judgement-proof to dodge a record libel award against it have been relieved by
an out-of-court settlement approved by the Ontario Court of Appeal.

Under terms of the settlement, the Toronto organization must
give government lawyer S. Casey Hill $29,350 toward legal costs he incurred to
fight its appeal of a $1.6-million Ontario Court award for libelling him.

The Toronto
Scientologists must also pay another $300,000 into court as security against
Mr. Hill's legal bills in fighting the appeal.

Both payments are to be made by Dec. 31.

In addition, the Church of Scientology has been given
until Tuesday to discharge a $2.8-million (U.S.) mortgage against the Yonge
Street headquarters of the Church of Scientology of Toronto, registered within
weeks of the jury making the libel award in October, 1991. The mortgage was in
favour fo the Scientology International
Reserves Trust.

Another term of the settlement calls for the Churhc of Scientology to give Mr.
Hill's lawyers papers permitting him to discharge another mortgage on the
property, for $3,147,453.78 in Canadian funds, in the event a final judgement
remains unpaid 30 days after it is obtained.

A court order that sets out the terms notes that lawyers for the Church of
Scientology have given
assurances that it "intends to pay the full amount of any final judgement
which may be awarded in favour of S. Casey Hill in this matter and as a matter
of good faith, but without in any way admitting the invalidity of certain
mortgages referred to in this order."

The order was signed by Madam Justice Hilda McKinlay, who presided at a
Nov. 25 hearing during which Mr. Hill's lawyer, Robert Armstrong, accused Scientology's
international office of trying to make the Toronto organization
judgement-proof by registering mortgages worth more than the Yonge Street
property's value.

Noting that the building had recently been appraised at $6-million, the
lawyer asserted that the mortgaging, ostensibly to pay legal fees associated
with the libel case and a criminal trial, encumbered the Toronto organization's
assets "to the extent that there is essentially nothing left."

Judge McKinlay was told that the mortgages involved loans by Scientology organizations.

Kitchener lawyer Marc Somerville, representing the Church of Scientology, described the
award as "the largest libel judgement in Canada by a multiple of five."

Globe and Mail, Saturday, April 19, 1997, P. A9 Court
rejects Scientology's
religious-freedom argument by Thomas Claridge The Ontario Court of Appeal has
upheld the 1992 conviction of the Church of Scientology of Toronto and one of its
officers on two counts of criminal breach of trust stemming from covert
operations of its Guardian's Office more than 20 years ago.

In a 143-page ruling released late yesterday, a three-judge panel rejected
arguments by Scientology lawyers that
incorporated non-profit religious associations should not be held liable for
unauthorized criminal acts committed by individuals within their ranks.

Although agreeing that the liability infringed guarantees of religious
freedom in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the court held that the
infringement was permissible under Section 1 of the Charter as a reasonable
limit in a free and democratic society.

Speaking for the court, Mr. Justice Marc Rosenberg concluded that there was
no possible "reformulation of corporate criminal liability that will not
infringe" the guarantee of religious freedom. "The mere prosecution of the
church will stigmatize the parishioners and members and divert funds from
religious purposes to defence of the charge.

"Even if the prosecution were limited to the acts of the board of
directors, it would infringe freedom of religion since the liability would
still be imposed on the corporation on a vicarious basis. The 'innocent'
parishioners would be required to fund the defence, and church property would
be at risk if the church were convicted and a fine imposed."

Judge Rosenberg said the objective of applying criminal liability to
religious corporations "relates to a fundamental tenet of our society, namely
that no person is above or beyond the law."

He went on to observe that imposing criminal liability on the corporation
for acts of its managers was also needed "to protect vulnerable persons within
the hierarchy. . . . To relieve the corporation of liability when the managers
have abused their positions to benefit the corporation would aggravate the
powerlessness of the victims."

He noted that the breaches of trust victimized "large, powerful
institutions such as the Ontario Provincial Police and the Ministry of the
Attorney-General," whose offices had been infiltrated by church agents in the
mid-1970s. "In another case, however, the victims could be the parishioners or
members themselves."

Judge Rosenberg said that if courts adopted a lower standard of criminal
liability for religious corporations, "this would necessarily invite inquiry"
into whether their religious goals "were genuine or a mere sham to take
advantage of the preferential treatment."

In upholding a $250,000 fine imposed by Mr. Justice James Southey of the
Ontario Court's General Division, Judge Rosenberg said the offences
"represented a deliberate attempt to undermine the effectiveness of the
law-enforcement agencies.

"This was not simply an intelligence-gathering exercise. The appellant had
planted its agents in these agencies so that they would be able to anticipate
and counter the efforts of these agencies to enforce the law."

Beyond that, he said, the offences "represented the execution of a
carefully conceived plan," and the agents had been given special instructions
to assist them in carrying out their activity. The agents themselves "were not
acting for personal gain but under the belief instilled by the appellant that
these acts were necessary to protect their church."

He also agreed with Judge Southey that the church had "at no time admitted
responsibility for these offences or expressed remorse for its involvement."
It had stopped the activity only because the risk of discovery was putting it
in jeopardy.

A significant fine "was appropriate to encourage compliance by other
entities who might otherwise adopt a similar strategy and attempt to subvert
the public service and interfere with the administration of justice."

The main issue raised on behalf of Jacqueline Matz, the church official who
was responsible for supervising agents planted in various government agencies
and other organizations, was that her lawyer should have been able to address
the jury after the Crown made its closing submissions. In its ruling, the
court said the issue is currently before the Supreme Court of Canada.

Last night, Rev. Al Buttnor, director of public affairs for Scientology in Toronto, said the church
was pleased by the court pointing out that the church had "removed and
expelled over 15-20 years ago those who were responsible for the acts that
underlie this case" and had taken steps to ensure that this type of conduct
would never be repeated.

"We are pleased," Mr. Buttnor said, "that the court has clearly
acknowledged that the past is not the present, and recognized that current
church officials and members are clearly distinct from the renegades who were
thrown out of the church by 1983, before any hint of prosecution."